On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 10:22:40AM +0100, Andreas Fink wrote: > I would suggest that recoding doesnt occur at all unless its necessary. > This means that every SMSC driver would need to be aware of all > coding types and recode once from source to target if needed.
Unfortunately you can't do sms-split right without knowing the target character set. Probably the smsbox will have to convert to the specified data coding (such as GSM charset) before splitting. This might mean that the SMSC driver then has to convert back to iso-latin-1 or something in order to satisfy the SMSC protocol. A related problem is that the smsbox might not always know what the maximum sms size is. Historically it is predictable, but it seems that for example SMPP is in the process of dropping these size limits. This might mean that the real solution is to push sms splitting all the way to the SMSC drivers, and provide library functions to avoid duplicated code. But that means that the SMSC drivers would have to know about smsbox configurations such as split-chars and headers and footers... It might simplify delivery notification, though, if an sms isn't split until the last moment. On the other hand it might mean passing huge messages through the system because max-messages isn't applied until the last step. -- Richard Braakman Will write free software for money. See http://www.xs4all.nl/~dark/resume.html
