From: gopher-bounce@complete.org Date: Sun Aug 10 01:50:59 2008 Subject: [gopher] Re: Gopherness Lets test the Older Clients for UTF-8 handling, and write the results on a table. gopher://home.jumpjet.info/11\Begin_Here\Clients For Starters, we can report on how the Clients each of us are using are handling this (and could someone run a UTF-8 Gopher Server that we can test our Clients against)? --- On Mon, 8/4/08, Kyevan <kyevan@sinedev.org> wrote: From: Kyevan <kyevan@sinedev.org> Subject: [gopher] Re: Gopherness To: gopher@complete.org Date: Monday, August 4, 2008, 12:19 PM What about older clients, though? Modern clients will probably handle UTF-8 at least well enough to not explode, but older clients might not. Generally, it seems safest to stick to the subset that is ASCII when reasonable, only using UTF-8 or such when it's actually needed. ... is a perfectly readable replacement for U+2026, even if it's not "typographically correct." On the other hand, if you're trying to post a text in, say, a mix of Arabic, and Klingon, go right ahead and use UTF-8. Cameron Kaiser wrote: > I can see where it might be troublesome for filenames and selectors to be > UTF-8, although that would be a local filesystem and/or server issue. > > However, there's nothing really preventing the use of UTF-8 in Gopher, > and in fact I am personally aware of several sites that use it. Overbite > does support it and the most current version has a bug with encoding smoked > out which should make it nearly perfect. I was testing it on both a Big5 > encoded Chinese gopher site and another UTF-8 encoded menu, and it renders > correctly.