[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .. .
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .. .
- From: SIMON WESTRIP <simonwestrip@btinternet.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:32:05 +0000 (GMT)
Dear Howard
My reply to your last message was marked as 'spam' by my mail tool when I received the copy, so I'm sending it again in case your mail tool also 'spams it'
Previous reply:
1) So if a compliant CIF2 processing system can reject any non-UTF-8 CIF,
all non-UTF-8 CIFs are non-compliant?
2) So why not just state that only Unicode encodings are acceptable?
Cheers
Simon
PS I totally accept the point you're making about how we are often oblivious to the underlying encoding used by our software,
but it also demonstrates what can happen if you do not know what the encoding is :-)
My reply to your last message was marked as 'spam' by my mail tool when I received the copy, so I'm sending it again in case your mail tool also 'spams it'
Previous reply:
1) So if a compliant CIF2 processing system can reject any non-UTF-8 CIF,
all non-UTF-8 CIFs are non-compliant?
2) So why not just state that only Unicode encodings are acceptable?
Cheers
Simon
PS I totally accept the point you're making about how we are often oblivious to the underlying encoding used by our software,
but it also demonstrates what can happen if you do not know what the encoding is :-)
_______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .. .
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .. .
- Prev by thread: [ddlm-group] A useful web page
- Next by thread: [ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2?
- Index(es):