Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:53:27 -0400 krishna e bera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Supporting only ASCII (which essentially means English-only) in this day >and age is a form of cultural imperialism. Tor needs users in every country, Bullshit. >in every language, to be fully effective and available. Fine. Start as many lists as you would like, each dedicated to a language and character set of your choice. >So even if we speak only English on this listserv, it would seem inappropiate My point exactly. Postings to this list are written in English, as a rule, though there may have been a case or two where someone posted something *in ASCII text*, who then got assistance off the list (i.e., by private email) by another subscriber who knew the language of the person needing assistance. If you want communication to be widespread, then you should simplify the method of communication to the greatest common factor, which is ASCII, not EBCDIC, not HTML, not unicode. >to fault people for using standards-compliant unicode-capable mailers, >or ask them to override default behaviour of their software to support >apps on legacy proprietary operating systems. Sort of like what you want me to do, right? > >Source code is available for other mail packages for Solaris, >as well as packages like GNU recode. I repeat: I am not the administrator of this system. Period. >If you choose not to use one, then in the rare case someone posts >a base64-encoded message on a subject of interest, you could >ask someone to send you the trancoded message. If someone posts a block of ASCII digits, as happened in the case that prompted all of this discussion, I'm really not interested in pursuing it further. If the original poster wanted it to be legible enough to be of potential interest to the widest audience on this list, then the original poster would have sent it as ASCII text. As it was, it really looked like some massmailer had managed to hit the list and, with a little luck, the list owner would attempt to block it in the future. Even the Subject: header contained junk, a common massmail property. Now please stop. This is off-topic and should be unnecessary to explain in the first place, just as the reasons for not top-posting should be obvious. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
Supporting only ASCII (which essentially means English-only) in this day and age is a form of cultural imperialism. Tor needs users in every country, in every language, to be fully effective and available. So even if we speak only English on this listserv, it would seem inappropiate to fault people for using standards-compliant unicode-capable mailers, or ask them to override default behaviour of their software to support apps on legacy proprietary operating systems. Source code is available for other mail packages for Solaris, as well as packages like GNU recode. If you choose not to use one, then in the rare case someone posts a base64-encoded message on a subject of interest, you could ask someone to send you the trancoded message.
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:00:58 +0200 Florian Reitmeir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Scott Bennett wrote: >> Then you should send your suggestion to Sun Microsystems, Inc., not >>to me, because this particular implementation is the Solaris version. You >>may also want to suggest something similar to the FreeBSD development team >>for UCBmail (likewise the NetBSD and OpenBSD teams) because that is included >>in the base system just as mailx is with Solaris, and probably also to >>the LINUX developers, though I don't use LINUX and do not know for sure >>that they maintain a version of mailx. It is indeed a UNIX standard, so >>live with it. > >the man-page of mailx on UNIX states: You fail to mention which sort of UNIX you're looking at. > >--- snap >mailx supports the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) standard >in two ways: it supports the creation of multipart and text/enriched >messages, and supports the reading of MIME messages by automatically >invoking the metamail(1) program when necessary. >--- snap The Solaris version doesn't support it, and there is no mention of MIME in the man page for it. > >and the man-page of metamail: > >--- snap >Note also that metamail automatically decodes mail that has been encoded >for 7-bit transport if the mail includes a ``Content-Transfer-Encoding'' >header as specified by RFC 1341. If data has been encoded via the >"base64" encoding, it will map CRLF to local newlines for textual data, >but not for other data, unless instructed otherwise by a textualnewlines >field in a mailcap entry. >--- snap > So what? > >so why not just end the discussion, by correctly configuring your >mailclient? > As previously noted more than once, there is no support for either non-ASCII character sets or MIME in the Solaris mailx. See another message for a practical reason for my not changing mailers at this time. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:47:15 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Scott Bennett: >> It is indeed a UNIX standard, so live with it. > >And MIME is an IETF standard, so live with it. A very adopted one, btw. I do, thank you, but only when I need it to transfer non-ASCII file types. It's fine for private email, though it does introduce security risks for many users, but it's still a bad idea for mailing lists. Many modern lists have scrubbers that remove all MIME attachments for that reason. > >People using webmailers like gmail.com don't even have a choice how >their mail gets assembled. But you have a choice to switch your mailer First, I am not the administrator of this system. >to a current one. I suggest you to try out "mutt". I don't use it, as Second, I am using this system until it dies. Then I'll have to find a different place to deal with email. Until that happens, I have no way of knowing which mailers will be available to me wherever I end up. If I switch interfaces, it will have to wait until then because I see no point in doing it twice. In any case, there is no need for threading in OR-TALK, and the character set should still be ASCII. >I prefer graphical user interfaces, but purists like you have fun with >it and it is up-to-date software. (Man, incredible, I had these >discussions already 10 years ago.) > I hope you enjoyed the review. :-) Now let's stop this, and get back to discussing tor-related matters. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Scott Bennett wrote: Then you should send your suggestion to Sun Microsystems, Inc., not to me, because this particular implementation is the Solaris version. You may also want to suggest something similar to the FreeBSD development team for UCBmail (likewise the NetBSD and OpenBSD teams) because that is included in the base system just as mailx is with Solaris, and probably also to the LINUX developers, though I don't use LINUX and do not know for sure that they maintain a version of mailx. It is indeed a UNIX standard, so live with it. the man-page of mailx on UNIX states: --- snap mailx supports the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) standard in two ways: it supports the creation of multipart and text/enriched messages, and supports the reading of MIME messages by automatically invoking the metamail(1) program when necessary. --- snap and the man-page of metamail: --- snap Note also that metamail automatically decodes mail that has been encoded for 7-bit transport if the mail includes a ``Content-Transfer-Encoding'' header as specified by RFC 1341. If data has been encoded via the "base64" encoding, it will map CRLF to local newlines for textual data, but not for other data, unless instructed otherwise by a textualnewlines field in a mailcap entry. --- snap so why not just end the discussion, by correctly configuring your mailclient? -- Florian Reitmeir
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
Scott Bennett: It is indeed a UNIX standard, so live with it. And MIME is an IETF standard, so live with it. A very adopted one, btw. People using webmailers like gmail.com don't even have a choice how their mail gets assembled. But you have a choice to switch your mailer to a current one. I suggest you to try out "mutt". I don't use it, as I prefer graphical user interfaces, but purists like you have fun with it and it is up-to-date software. (Man, incredible, I had these discussions already 10 years ago.)
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:32:36 + scar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scott Bennett @ 2008/07/22 23:21: >> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 "=?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy > b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj > [remainder of junk deleted --SB] Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. >>> As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. >>> It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you >>> use that won't decode this for you? >> >> I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple >> of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or >> UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It >> handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other >> character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do >> so on mailing lists. > >this is silly, but > >mailx needs a patch, then. it may have been created during a time when >ASCII was all that was needed. but, times change. lot's of other Then you should send your suggestion to Sun Microsystems, Inc., not to me, because this particular implementation is the Solaris version. You may also want to suggest something similar to the FreeBSD development team for UCBmail (likewise the NetBSD and OpenBSD teams) because that is included in the base system just as mailx is with Solaris, and probably also to the LINUX developers, though I don't use LINUX and do not know for sure that they maintain a version of mailx. It is indeed a UNIX standard, so live with it. >people out there use non-ASCII characters, and UTF-8 is starting to >become a standard character set. like was mentioned, the e-mail >conformed to RFC standards. if your client can't handle these standards >then you are complaining to the wrong people (read: write to the authors >of mailx! ;-) ). > Tough. All the extra fluff that has been added to email over the years is yet another source of security headaches. I choose to stick with an interface that is tried and true, can be found on any UNIX system I use or will likely ever use in the future, and presents no security risks at all. This list is about tor. People posting to it should use a universally accepted format, in this case, plain, ASCII text if they want to be understood. No MIME, just ASCII. The places for other such things are lists chartered specifically in another language, USENET news groups, web pages for HTML and/or images, private email, and probably some others I've overlooked. One of the nice things about the OR-TALK mailing list is that it is generally a low-volume list, not a 50+ messages per day list (which I would subscribe to in digest format or else look for a gatewayed version in USENET anyway), so there is really no need for subject threading anyway. It's a good list. Let's keep it that way. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Scott Bennett @ 2008/07/22 23:21: > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: >>> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 "=?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?=" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj [remainder of junk deleted --SB] >>> Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? >>> It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an >>> HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. >> As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. >> It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you >> use that won't decode this for you? > > I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple > of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or > UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It > handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other > character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do > so on mailing lists. this is silly, but mailx needs a patch, then. it may have been created during a time when ASCII was all that was needed. but, times change. lot's of other people out there use non-ASCII characters, and UTF-8 is starting to become a standard character set. like was mentioned, the e-mail conformed to RFC standards. if your client can't handle these standards then you are complaining to the wrong people (read: write to the authors of mailx! ;-) ). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFIhnwkXhfCJNu98qARCEzdAKCic9ngtlxLINz13xYP1QJVUmYOuQCeMrto i1rYKNENY2eWSReoJWnzEgU= =Ve0K -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0200 Ansgar Wiechers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 "=?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?=" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy >> >b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj >> > [remainder of junk deleted --SB] >> >> Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? >> It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an >> HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. > >As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. >It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you >use that won't decode this for you? I'm using mailx(1), which is the SysV equivalent of UCBmail, the staple of UNIX systems for decades. It is safe, reliable, and either mailx or UCBmail is found on just about every kind of UNIX still in use today. It handles mail headers and plain, ASCII text. If you want to use other character sets in private email, that's fine, but it's not appropriate to do so on mailing lists. > >Besides, before complaining about other people's messages, I'd suggest >you start with fixing your own. Like, by not omitting References and >In-Reply-To headers. > If I were using a news reader, e.g. tin or trn, to read and post to a USENET news group about tor, that kind of thing would be handled by the news reader. However, I'm instead reading and posting to a mailing list about tor. Subject: lines are included, and quoted messages are cited and indented properly. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **
[OT] message formats (was: browser footprint)
On 2008-07-21 Scott Bennett wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 05:24:22 +0200 "=?UTF-8?Q?Tom=C3=A1s_Arribas?=" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >PiBUb3IgaXNuJ3QgdGhlIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIGJlIG1hbmdsaW5nIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBy > >b3RvY29scyBpZiBpdAo+IGNhbiBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLiAgVGhhdCdzIGZvciBwcm90b2NvbC1zcGVj > > [remainder of junk deleted --SB] > > Is there some good reason for posting crap like the above to this list? > It's bad enough that some insist upon posting their message along with an > HTML duplicate, but at least there is usually some original text content. As per RFC 2045 base64 is a valid transfer encoding for a message body. It was declared correctly in the header, too. What kind of MUA do you use that won't decode this for you? Besides, before complaining about other people's messages, I'd suggest you start with fixing your own. Like, by not omitting References and In-Reply-To headers. Regards Ansgar Wiechers -- "The Mac OS X kernel should never panic because, when it does, it seriously inconveniences the user." --http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2004/tn2118.html
