Re: Re: Limit of an expression?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg67687] Re: [mg67649] Re: Limit of an expression?
- From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 01:58:52 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <a02020013-1047-ppc-0CE84DF6D03942048D533D68B2172BE2@QuarkNew.local>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
I don't agree with most things in your response but I also do wish to spend any more time on this discussion so I will respond to just one point and make one additional one. >> Thus I never normally experience any problem with messages that I >> posted myself and which contain Unicode text. > > It would be a very sorry state of affairs for any client if it > could not display messages it sent correctly. According to you a client cannot recognize the encoding information when it has been stripped from the headers. How come then Mail can do so? In fact, it recognizes correctly Unicode no only in the messages that I posted but in all messages except those that actually contain wrong encoding information. These are never messages coming form the MathGroup (I have never had a problem with these) but sent to me directly by users. In fact this is exactly what happened this time: all posts that were sent to the MathGroup and contained the supposedly illegible text that I originally posted appeared correct when I received them. Even the post by David Cantrell where he first mentioned this issue, came to me looking perfectly normal (which is why it took me some time to understand what point he was making). On the other hand in the messages that you and David Park sent to me directly, which did not go through the MathGroup server, the quoted text is illegible until the message is manually converted to Unicode. So as far as I am concerned the mathGroup settings are perfect and yours have the effect of passing to me your own encoding problems. Finally, please note that, unlike you, I do not use an anti-spam address, although I also receive spam. Editing your e-mail address is at least as much trouble as converting a message to Unicode, and moreover, since I generally forget to do this I usually receive a bounce of message whenever I respond to anything posted by you. Andrzej Kozlowski On 4 Jul 2006, at 01:03, Bill Rowe wrote: > On 7/3/06 at 11:29 PM, akoz at mimuw.edu.pl (Andrzej Kozlowski) wrote: > >> On 3 Jul 2006, at 19:38, Bill Rowe wrote: > >>>> Actually, the above should be perfectly legible to you and anyone >>>> using a reasonably modern e-mail program. All you have to do is >>>> to make sure that the message is displayed with Unicode (UTF-8) >>>> encoding. > >>> Unfortunately, it isn't quite as simple as your comments above >>> imply. The problem is there is no single setting of an email client >>> that can be guaranteed to display messages on this properly as >>> UTF-8 isn't the only encoding a poster might use. So, while I do >>> have a client that will display UTF-8 properly, I find I have to >>> try several different encodings at times until I find the one that >>> seems to correctly display. The information needed for my client to >>> automatically select the proper display appears to either not have >>> been available in the first place or gets stripped as a result of >>> the moderator's actions. > >>> Hence as the moderator said > >>>> [It is better if posters do not send messages in this form in the >>>> first place -moderator] > >> I do not think your comments apply to anything I have ever >> experienced on this mailing list. > > I can accept you have not experienced this issue, but I have. > >> You write "a poster might use" another encoding but on earth >> should he? >> In fact, I never deliberately "use" UTF-8 - it is enough to copy and >> paste any InputForm of a Mathematica expression that contains Greek >> letters or signs like ² into Apple's Mail and the message will be >> automatically sent as Unicode, without my "choosing" anything. > > Right, but there are clients which will automatically select > something other than Unicode. And for users of those clients, I > suspect they too would say they did not deliberately use the > particular coding their client. > >> Moreover, such messages are always recognized (again by Apple's >> Mail of >> course) as Unicode when I get them back form the MathGroup server. >> The >> headers in posts I receive from the MathGroup mail server ) never >> contain encoding information (quite properly, > > I disagree that it is proper to strip the encoding information. But > since neither you nor I can control that, whether it is proper or > not is moot. > >> which makes it possible for Apple's Mail to recognize Unicode encoded >> messages automatically. > > I can set my client to display UTF-8. But without the encoding > information in the headers, my client has no way to automatically > display other encodings correctly with this setting. > >> Thus I never normally experience any problem with messages that I >> posted myself and which contain Unicode text. > > It would be a very sorry state of affairs for any client if it > could not display messages it sent correctly. > >> Problems appear only when such text is quoted by others, whose mail >> clients did not correctly recognize the encoding. In such cases a >> header that looks like this might appear: > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >> If this happens Apple Mail will not attempt to recognize the >> encoding and will display it incorrectly. But in this case just one >> trip to the Text Encoding menu fixes the problem. There is never a >> need to try any other encoding but UTF-8 on this list, because >> unless someone deliberately used a non-Latin encoding the only >> possibility is Unicode. > > Again, my experience on the list differs. If I see something that > doesn't make sense, I assume it is encoded in UTF-8. And often this > proves correct. But I've found exceptions. In those cases, I have > to try a different encoding and repeat until I see something that > makes sense. Typically, the next thing I try is a Windows encoding > since I use a Mac which usually works if UTF-8 didn't. > >> Anyway, I have never experienced the problem with having to choose >> more >> than once, on this list anyway. It could of course be that Apple Mail >> is just much better in this respect than Windows mail clients but, in >> spite of my Mac-centrism, I can hardly believe it. > > Nor do I believe Apple Mail is that much better that Windows mail > clients. But, since I too use a Mac to read mail (but not Apple > Mail) on this list, I've no real basis for comparison. > -- > To reply via email subtract one hundred and four