Re: Processing nodelists with UTF?   
     By: Roy Witt to Nicholas Boel on Sat Jan 21 2012 01:02 pm   
      
    > Because there is ancient FTN software that would be affected by the use of   
    > UTF-8...it would be better to make this or new software that is backward   
    > compatable.   
      
   I definitely agree with this. I, among others I'm sure, would move on. The ones   
   that don't want to wouldn't be affected, as they would just see posts like we   
   currently do, where the UTF-8 characters get jumbled into something else. I   
   wouldn't support the idea if the backwards compatibility wasn't there.   
      
    >  NB> I mean, just supporting high ascii would be kind of the cheesy   
    >  NB> hack just to get it to work "for now".. wouldn't it?   
      
    > Add UTF-8 to it but don't take away anything it can do now.   
      
   Yep. Totally agree.   
      
    > It's been quoted twice as it went out from here.   
      
   Which ones came back to you correct, if you don't mind me asking? Let's be   
   honest here. I'm not trying to put anyone down, or insult anyone. I'm trying to   
   find where the problem lies, and hopefully fix it.    
      
   To be honest, I *hope* it's Janis's system. Because she's still in   
   communication with the developer, and he's still active. That would make it a   
   much more easy fix, than say if it were some random BBS software that's   
   completely dead in the water.   
      
    > Shhhhh, somebody might make you an offer you can't refuse.   
      
   Well.. it would have to set me up for awhile, anyway. Syncronet is doing just   
   fine for me over here. Also with great active developers.   
      
   --   
   Nick aka axisd - telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org   
                    http://pharcyde.org   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux   
    * Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)