Den 2009-06-25 16:26 skrev Pierre Ossman: > 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.
This is exactly my point. You can't use anything but ASCII it you want it to display as intended. And this fact will remain for a looong time. If I have an RFB server somewhere that serves a variety of clients. 50% of the clients speak CP1252, 30% speak UTF-8 and 10% speak ISO 8859-1 and 9% speak ISO 8859-whatever. The last percent (probably less) speak something non-ASCII-compatible, but I don't care about those because that's just not compatible... If I really want to serve some "international" text in that scenario, what options do I have? Whatever I do, it will look like crap for many. IMO, the least crappy thing to do is to transliterate to ASCII (i.e. skåra -> skara), then if I know that the client supports UTF-8, I'll use DesktopName and resend. Replace with whatever protocol entity you like. That way it will look decent everywhere, and I will get the 100% correct message across when possible. On the other hand, if many just start forcing UTF-8 but not the main player, there will always be a significant portion of clients that will end up with crappy texts. And that will be the case whatever you do. If you translitterate to ASCII it looks a little bit crappy everywhere. If you force UTF-8 it looks more crappy, just not everywhere. skåra -> skara is just way better than skåra -> skÃ¥ra IMHO. Cheers, Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tigervnc-rfbproto mailing list tigervnc-rfbproto@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-rfbproto
