On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:38:09 +0200 Peter Rosin <p...@lysator.liu.se> wrote:
> I don't want this, sorry. This is an incompatible change. I think we > need to go with the common denominator (which is ASCII), then use some > kind of extension mechanism that changes over to UTF-8. Incompatible is a term that will have to be used loosly here. There is no compatibility here today as everyone is doing different things, so I don't see this move making things any worse. Would you feel different about things if there was a note stating that ASCII should be used for maximum compatibility, but retaining the preference for UTF-8? > If Real can be coaxed into doing the switch to UTF-8 w/o using an > extension for their free alternative, I'll reconsider. However, I > think that will be hard given the amount of love they spend on that > part of their offering. I'm not sure how their version will affect anything. Given the history, you can never be sure that this field will display correctly when using anything other than ASCII. Rgds -- Pierre Ossman OpenSource-based Thin Client Technology System Developer Telephone: +46-13-21 46 00 Cendio AB Web: http://www.cendio.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ tigervnc-rfbproto mailing list tigervnc-rfbproto@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-rfbproto
