Ivan Van Laningham wrote:
>
> I think something else is going on, besides just the only line
> ending. I'm using two versions of T-Bird, 1.5 and 2.0 something, and
> both display the message concerned the same way, all crammed together on
> a single line. I think there must be some encoding
Hi everyone. Just as a followup, Katrina on the Eudora list I am on came up
with a UTF-8 decoder plug-in.
http://windharp.de/software/utf8iso.htm
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote at 07:22 PM 06/26/2007:
>Mark Sapiro writes:
>
> > I don't know if there is a standard that says your MUA 'should'
> > reco
Mark Sapiro writes:
> I don't know if there is a standard that says your MUA 'should'
> recognize a single in the decoded text as a line break,
Since it's in UTF-8, Unicode does, Technical Annex #14. Conformance
is required by Unicode 4.0.
Of course if the MUA doesn't claim conformance to Un
Hi All--
Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
> I don't know if there is a standard that says your MUA 'should'
> recognize a single in the decoded text as a line break, but of
> five MUA's I just tried, four - Ultrafunk Popcorn 1.76, Mozilla
> Thunderbird 2.0.0.4, MS Outlook Express 6 and Mutt 1.4.2.1i - all
Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
>My guess (I haven't actually looked at the raw decoded message) is that
>the decoded plain text has *nix only line endings as opposed to
> endings. This would not violate RFC 2821 as the data on the
>wire is the base64 encoded data, not the original text.
I have now looked,
Michael Welch wrote:
>Hi again. The problem seemed cured, now I am getting garbled posts again.
Here's my guess about the 'missing' line returns.
The original posts in the "I lost my patch :-(" thread were in charset
utf-8 and were base64 encoded. So were a couple of the posts in
today's "expo
Thanks Brad & Dan for straightening me out. Kinda embarrassing, since I am a
header watcher.
Peace.
Brad Knowles wrote at 09:29 AM 06/26/2007:
>On 6/26/07, Michael Welch wrote:
>
>> Hi again. The problem seemed cured, now I am getting garbled posts again.
>>
>> Further, this post took a full 6
On 6/26/07, Michael Welch wrote:
> Hi again. The problem seemed cured, now I am getting garbled posts again.
>
> Further, this post took a full 6 days to show up after I sent it.
>
> Maybe I am on moderation, and the moderator is slow at checking in. Or ??
Try checking your headers again:
Hi again. The problem seemed cured, now I am getting garbled posts again.
Further, this post took a full 6 days to show up after I sent it.
Maybe I am on moderation, and the moderator is slow at checking in. Or ??
Michael Welch wrote at 07:04 PM 06/20/2007:
>This list's posts started showing u
