Adrian Havill wrote:
> 2) Navigator seems to accept both UNICODE-1-1-UTF-8 and UTF-8 for the
> "charset" parameter in the Content-Type. It doesn't like
> "UNICODE-2-0-UTF-8" though. Does this mean that 2.0 is not supported?
If I have undersood matters correctly, UNICODE-1-1-UTF-8 refers to
Unicode 1.1/UTF-8, while UTF-8 (as "charset") refers to the UTF-8
of Unicode 2.0 ***or later***. The difference is that Hangul was
**moved** (and extended) between those versions. UNICODE-1-1-UTF-8
should never be generated for new messages/documents.
There seem to still be a problem in getting a "transfer-encoding"
of 8bit for e-mail headings. There is no way of saying that anyway,
only "?Q?" (for Q-P) and "?B?" (for Base64) seem to be allowed.
Please correct me if I am wrong!
David Goldsmith wrote:
> Finally, although SMTP agents may have gotten more 8-bit savvy, most mail
> clients I've seen on Macs and Wintel PCs still encode 8 bit content as
> quoted printable or Base64 *all the time*.
Even those that can send 8bit (which should not be difficult...;-)
unfortunately have QP as default (and many users don't change the
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:36 EDT