On Jul 2, 12:33am, Keld J|rn Simonsen wrote:
Subject: Re: 7/8-bit conversion vs. bouncing
% Ned is saying that we should not complicate things for the multipart
% people, in requiring things on them due to 8-bit mail.
Support for 8 bit character sets is important but that there is no
_technical_ reason why 8 bit character set encoded data MUST or SHOULD
be sent via a 8-bit SMTP transport mechanism. The 7-bit transport
mechanism FULLY SUPPORTS the European languages and the needs of
European users and does so in a manner which does not introduce
needless incompatibility with existing systems.
% I would argue the other way around....
% Depends on your interests, it seems.
Mine include the ability to handle not only European languages but
also Asian languages (e.g Chinese and Vietnamese). The idea is to
support what is needed to send multilingual text to other users and
8-bit transport isn't necessary to do this.
% I see 8-bit mail as a natural way to extent internet mailings for
% plain mail, the prime goal of mail. And this is to be done in the
% area I live, namely Europe - and it is also needed many other places.
% Multipart mail is a feinsmecker thing to me, I have never had the use
% for it and most of my customers do not burn for it either.
So use 7-bit transport to send your 8-bit character set encoded text
around. You have presented no problem needing solution.
% I think that many of my fellow European collegues feel the same
% like me, this was stated explicitely at the NETF meeting in Stockholm
% (where the multipart messaging was simply explicitely removed from
% the agenda because of lack of interest) and many other times from
% Europeans.
% I know that we are only Europeans and that other people
% may think otherwise.
Why should the IETF introduce gratuitious complexity on behalf of
8-bit transport when a 7-bit transport mechanism for 8-bit data is
entirely feasible and well specified ?
% But I will *not* ask for the IETF to consider the multipart issue
% for a less interesting issue and thus of less importance that
% the 8-bit mail - (which must not just be seen as an *enclave*
% issue, unless you want to see the whole of Europe being one big
% enclave with a lot of gateways...). I just will ask you all to consider
% the 8-bit mail a legitimate and natural Internet protocol - if the internet
% is ever going to be meaning something related to "international".
The requirements for "international" users include the ability to
express ALL languages (not just European 8-bit encoded ones). This
requirement does NOT require 8-bit transport, only a means to use
7-bit transport to send such data around. This 7-bit mechanism is
defined and is also backwards compatible with existing 7-bit transport
mechanisms. International users do NOT need 8-bit transport and it
is a Euro-centrist viewpoint to think so. Most languages won't fit
in 8 bits.
% And from this requirement I request the engineering people of the
% multipart stuff to apply their greatest skills in designing
% a multipart specification that is open to the (8-bit) world.
Show me where the existing spec doesn't support the 8-bit character
set world. I see no such deficiency and you haven't shown one here.
Ran
randall(_at_)Virginia(_dot_)EDU