Re: ``ASCII-compatible'' does not mean ``7-bit''



Wednesday, January 15, 2003, 1:54:32 PM, you wrote:
D.> RFC 2047 is _not_ compatible with ASCII. RFC 2047 specifies a different
D.> interpretation of some of those strings.

in case anyone wondered whether this thread had any hope of producing
anything productive, Dan's posting should be conclusive.

let's move on.

d/
-- 
 Dave <mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, (continued) Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Alan Barrett Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Bruce Lilly Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Keith Moore Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Charles Lindsey Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Keith Moore Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Charles Lindsey Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Dave Crocker Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Bruce Lilly ``ASCII-compatible'' does not mean ``7-bit'', D. J. Bernstein Re: ``ASCII-compatible'' does not mean ``7-bit'', Keith Moore Re: ``ASCII-compatible'' does not mean ``7-bit'', Dave Crocker <= Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Russ Allbery Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Bruce Lilly Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, D. J. Bernstein Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Bruce Lilly

Previous by Date:	Re: Why we're in this mess, D. J. Bernstein
Next by Date:	Re: Why we're in this mess, D. J. Bernstein
Previous by Thread:	Re: ``ASCII-compatible'' does not mean ``7-bit'', Keith Moore
Next by Thread:	Re: UTF-8 over RFC 2047, Russ Allbery
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]