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.