On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 07:54:33PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > > > I'm not now advocating using RFC1945 - I have obviously been overruled. > > We might as well stick as close to possible to RFC1945 when applicable. I > think a minor change is no big deal considering the fact that no one else > is even attempting to follow standards and we don't need to be > interoperable with RFC1945 compliant software.
But why should we be bothered by RFC1945 at all? It documents something quite different from Freenet (HTTP/1.0), and it doesn't really effect Freenet. You should follow RFC1945 and its successor (I don't remember the particular number at this point) if you are writing a web browser, but Freenet isn't the web. > > English. Far better to support Unicode from the outset than have to > > kludge it in later. It's not as if it's difficult. We could always use UTF8 (read: ASCII). ;) > Last I heard, Lee Daniel Crocker was working on unicodifying the > ununicodified, which wasn't all that much. But he's disappeared since > then. -- Travis Bemann Sendmail is still screwed up on my box. My email address is really bemann at execpc.com. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 1402 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000817/9375511d/attachment.pgp>
