Hey Tim!
<Esc>:read !trans -b -no-ansi -t Čeština "I\'ve got squirrels in my pants\!"
V kalhotách mám veverky!
It works without adding any additional bullshit and is universal. Also
it doesn't screw up the Anglo-Saxon text tagline below which so-called CP895 would ... if it was real that is. DOS-think at it's finest.
Well at least it is fully supported in WinPoint (and tested AFAIR).
I for one would like to see the evidence.
Life is good,
Maurice
o- -o o- -o -o -o -o -o -o -o -o o-
/) (\ /) (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ /) ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ... Wræd sceal wunden, wracu heardum men.
A wound must have a bandage, an unyielding man must have revenge.
--- GNU bash, version 5.3.15(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
* Origin: Little Mikey's Brain - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001)
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
@REPLY: 2:2/29 d7f75507
@MSGID: 1:153/7001 87430585
@CHRS: UTF-8 4
Hey Tim!
<Esc>:read !trans -b -no-ansi -t etina "I\'ve got squirrels in my pants\!"
V kalhotch mm veverky!
It works without adding any additional bullshit and is universal. Also
it doesn't screw up the Anglo-Saxon text tagline below which so-called CP895 would ... if it was real that is. DOS-think at it's finest.
Well at least it is fully supported in WinPoint (and tested AFAIR).
I for one would like to see the evidence.
Life is good,
Maurice
o- -o o- -o -o -o -o -o -o -o -o o-
/) (\ /) (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ /) ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ... Wr?d sceal wunden, wracu heardum men.
A wound must have a bandage, an unyielding man must have revenge.
--- GNU bash, version 5.3.15(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
* Origin: Little Mikey's Brain - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001) SEEN-BY: 2/29 1000 103/705 104/119 121 114/10 30 124/5016 153/757
SEEN-BY: 153/7001 154/10 30 50 700 203/0 220/15 90 221/0 1 6 226/18 SEEN-BY: 226/20 44 50 229/310 426 240/1120 5832 263/1 280/464 1043 SEEN-BY: 280/5003 5006 5555 292/789 854 8125 301/1 310/31 320/219
SEEN-BY: 335/364 341/66 234 396/45 400/2992 410/9 421/79 790 423/120 SEEN-BY: 460/58 463/68 633/280 712/848 770/1 2320/105 3634/12 5020/545 SEEN-BY: 5020/715 1042 5030/1997 5060/900
@PATH: 153/7001 154/10 280/464 292/854
Tim Schattkowsky wrote to Maurice Kinal <=-
//Hello Maurice,//
on *08.10.26* at *1:15:46* You wrote in Area *FTSC_PUBLIC*
to *Tim Schattkowsky* about *"FTSC"*.
Comes as CP895 ...
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
@REPLY: 2:2/29 d7f75507
@MSGID: 1:153/7001 87430585
@CHRS: UTF-8 4
Hey Tim!
<Esc>:read !trans -b -no-ansi -t etina "I\'ve got squirrels in my pants\!"
V kalhotch mm veverky!
It works without adding any additional bullshit and is universal. Also
it doesn't screw up the Anglo-Saxon text tagline below which so-called CP895 would ... if it was real that is. DOS-think at it's finest.
Well at least it is fully supported in WinPoint (and tested AFAIR).
I for one would like to see the evidence.
Life is good,
Maurice
o- -o o- -o -o -o -o -o -o -o -o o-
/) (\ /) (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ (\ /) ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ... Wr?d sceal wunden, wracu heardum men.
A wound must have a bandage, an unyielding man must have revenge.
--- GNU bash, version 5.3.15(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
* Origin: Little Mikey's Brain - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001) SEEN-BY: 2/29 1000 103/705 104/119 121 114/10 30 124/5016 153/757
SEEN-BY: 153/7001 154/10 30 50 700 203/0 220/15 90 221/0 1 6 226/18 SEEN-BY: 226/20 44 50 229/310 426 240/1120 5832 263/1 280/464 1043 SEEN-BY: 280/5003 5006 5555 292/789 854 8125 301/1 310/31 320/219
SEEN-BY: 335/364 341/66 234 396/45 400/2992 410/9 421/79 790 423/120 SEEN-BY: 460/58 463/68 633/280 712/848 770/1 2320/105 3634/12 5020/545 SEEN-BY: 5020/715 1042 5030/1997 5060/900
@PATH: 153/7001 154/10 280/464 292/854
Regards,
Tim
--- WinPoint 419.0
* Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)
Comes as CP895 ...
encoding table to check it against. How exactly did you accomplish
the conversion from utf-8 to cp895? I noted that you only had issues
with the '??' character in the Anglo-Saxon part. Looking at the
tagline below I am guessing '??' would also be a problem for cp895.
I started to write own cp895.h for iconv (nearly finished)
take 852 895 CHS conversion table from Golded (I have)
Sure but I'd still have reservations as to the legitimacy of such a
thing. What does IBM think cp895 is? I believe it is one of their codepages and has nothing to do with ??e??tina. Also I note that
That in itself offers nothing as to credibility.
As I maybe said, we have 91 conferences in r42 (ok, traffic is
debatable).
4x allow only 7bit, 2 allow cp852 or cp895, 72 allow only
cp895 and 13 does not say.
The only thing I wanted here was to move cp895 from "not allowed" in fidonet - to "is used in named conferences and is tolerated".
As I maybe said, we have 91 conferences in r42 (ok, traffic is
debatable).
The only thing I wanted here was to move cp895 from "not allowed" in
fidonet - to "is used in named conferences and is tolerated".
Those numbers are totally meaningless. The only meaningfull number is: "how many of those 11 sysops are stuck with CP895 and are unable to
change to something else?". Area rules do not come from God. Just
are on your own. That CP895 is used in R42 has been tolerated for
decades and that will not change. The rest of Fidonet will not use
CP895 and that will not change either.
We tested 3 of us to use UTF. Somebody is thinking about that. And
some people simply can not (e.g. OS/2 etc)
That CP895 is used in R42 has been tolerated for decades and that
will not change. The rest of Fidonet will not use CP895 and that will
not change either.
OK then. I will print that message.
The only thing I wanted here was to move cp895 from "not allowed" in
fidonet - to "is used in named conferences and is tolerated".
Why? If it is already working for those needing it why rock the compatibilty boat?
... especially considering fts-5003.001 is total bullshit.
we should move into the direction of getting away from that codepage
shit.
FTS-5003 has been of use to the Fidonet community.
we should move into the direction of getting away from that codepage shit.If it were only that easy. I am sure there would be much grief from the CP437 crowd.
we should move into the direction of getting away from that codepage
shit.
If it were only that easy.
I am sure there would be much grief from the CP437 crowd.
Speaking for myself, it matters not as long as the 8 bit codes are actually what they say they are
and not simply some ill advised nonexistent codepage without any
reference map/table so that a proper critique could be advanced by
someone who actually cares about standards and is prepared to defend
them with credible references, such as IANA in the case of codepages.
FTS-5003 has been of use to the Fidonet community.
I fail to see how. I believe any usefulness to be found in the
Fidonet community is in spite of FTS-5003. :-)
we should move into the direction of getting away from that
codepage shit.
If it were only that easy. I am sure there would be much grief
from the CP437 crowd.
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that
splitting Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what
remains of) the network.
Frankly, plenty of sysops won't ever bother to upgrade, no matter what
new software gets released
or what the FTSC decides.
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that splitting Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what remains of) the network.
The CP866 crowd has always been more or less isolated from those that
use latin based alfabets. I don't see how UTF-8 will make much
difference.
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that splittingNothing is being split.
Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what remains of) the
network.
There is just an UTF8-type nodelist because it is an interesting project to have one's name being written in one's language. The functionality of the nodelist is not touched.
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that
splitting Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what
remains of) the network.
The CP437 is a relatively small minority anyway these days.
8 bit encoding can still be found in the museum we call Fidonet.
One can not please everyone all of the time.
I fail to see why the split over that particular issue. From what
I've witnessed over the decades is that most text messaging in Fidonet
is done in ascii, including utf8 and non-utf8.
we should move into the direction of getting away from that codepage
shit.
If it were only that easy.
I am sure there would be much grief from the CP437 crowd.
Speaking for myself, it matters not as long as the 8 bit codes are actually what they say they are
and not simply some ill advised nonexistent codepage without any
reference map/table so that a proper critique could be advanced by
someone who actually cares about standards and is prepared to defend
them with credible references, such as IANA in the case of codepages.
FTS-5003 has been of use to the Fidonet community.
I fail to see how. I believe any usefulness to be found in the
Fidonet community is in spite of FTS-5003. :-)
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that
splitting Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what
remains of) the network.
I fail to see why the split over that particular issue. From what
I've witnessed over the decades is that most text messaging in Fidonet
is done in ascii, including utf8 and non-utf8.
I fail to see why the split over that particular issue. From what I'veYeah, there are no languages in the world other than English. And no countries other than USA.
witnessed over the decades is that most text messaging in Fidonet is
done in ascii, including utf8 and non-utf8.
Yeah, there are no languages in the world other than English.
most mesages in Fidonet are written in Cyrillic.
Yeah, there are no languages in the world other than English.?F??P ??????P ??V?? ??B?? ??A???Z???B?????.
The CP866 crowd has always been more or less isolated from those
that use latin based alfabets. I don't see how UTF-8 will make
much difference.
Most stone age software cannot display UTF-8.
For latin text it doesn't matter, but cyrillic text in UTF-8 cannot be displayed on regular terminals and most old school BBSes. Even classic GoldED+ cannot display it, even through its xlat system. Only the
recent AI rewrite can handle it.
If/when people will start writing messages in UTF-8, a lot of software will display it as garbage. That's the difference.
If/when people will start writing messages in UTF-8, a lot ofMy Fidonet system could never Properly display Cyrillics, not even
software will display it as garbage. That's the difference.
CP866. I have been looking at garbage for decades. Now with the new
Golded I can see it properly. That's the difference.
Yegor Gluhov wrote to Alexey Fayans <=-
And, paradoxically, no cities other than Moscow aka Default City.
Do you see the problem now?
And, paradoxically, no cities other than Moscow aka Default City."Default City" sounds like a great name for a fictional dystopian
metropolis.
Do you see the problem now?I've been seeing it for ages now.
Too bad you've chosen to cripple yourself with inferior encodings.
This conversation is about a different thing.
No reason to continue this conversation, I guess.
The CP437 is a relatively small minority anyway these days.
Not really surprising given the lack of support for such encodings on
the web. The same can be said for CP850.
8 bit encoding can still be found in the museum we call Fidonet.
Personally I have no problem with that. How about you?
One can not please everyone all of the time.
That is because you're not trying hard enough.
If/when people will start writing messages in UTF-8, a lot of
software will display it as garbage. That's the difference.
My Fidonet system could never Properly display Cyrillics, not
even CP866. I have been looking at garbage for decades. Now with
the new Golded I can see it properly. That's the difference.
That's a different difference. You can see cyrillics properly now
even when the message is in CP866 because new GoldED uses UTF-8 internally.
No one says it's a bad thing. Bad thing would be to post messages in
UTF-8 for no reason and break systems that cannot display it properly while having no issues with displaying CP866.
I live in a part of the world where one eight bit encoding is not
enough.
I prefer to erase all traces of having tried...
No one says it's a bad thing. Bad thing would be to post messages inA good reason to post in UTF-8 instead of CP866 are Fidowide areas where both cyrillics and extended latin based characters are used.
UTF-8 for no reason and break systems that cannot display it properly
while having no issues with displaying CP866.
That's a different difference. You can see cyrillics properlyNot so much of a difference with Russian sysops using the old Golded
now even when the message is in CP866 because new GoldED uses
UTF-8 internally.
and being unable to properly see the o with umlaut in Bj?rn Felten's name.
No one says it's a bad thing. Bad thing would be to post messagesA good reason to post in UTF-8 instead of CP866 are Fidowide areas
in UTF-8 for no reason and break systems that cannot display it
properly while having no issues with displaying CP866.
where both cyrillics and extended latin based characters are used.
There's already some grief from the CP866 crowd claiming that splitting Fidonet into UTF-8 and non-UTF-8 parts will kill (what remains of) the network. Frankly, plenty of sysops won't ever bother to upgrade, no
matter what new software gets released or what the FTSC decides.
GoldED is just an example and it's not a problem to replace it. Real problem is the lack of UTF-8 support in old BBS software for DOS like Tornado, RA, EleBBS, Maximus, etc. People running it for retro stuff, not for progress. And there are active users who read and post new messages from such systems. Won't be a huge loss for the whole network of corse, but the quesion is why breaking something that works well for no reason?
I can't think of a single example, but if there is - sure thing. It's
also fine for new areas where UTF-8 usage is allowed or even required by rules.
Most stone age software cannot display UTF-8.
UTF-8 is not a simple charset that can be converted to a 8-bit
charset
UTF-8 is not a simple charset that can be converted to a 8-bitThere should be no trouble converting this msg to cp866. I'd do it
charset
myself but I don't want to.
Hello Maurice!
On Fri, 13 Nov 2026 01:09, you wrote to me:
UTF-8 is not a simple charset that can be converted to a 8-bit
charset
There should be no trouble converting this msg to cp866. I'd do
it myself but I don't want to.
Yeah, converting latin from/to any charset is indeed trivial - you
just change the charset name and that's it.
... Music Station BBS | https://bbs.bsrealm.net |
telnet://bbs.bsrealm.net
--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Music Station | https://ms.bsrealm.net (2:5030/1997)
Yeah, converting latin from/to any charset is indeed trivial - you
just change the charset name and that's it.
Hello Rob!
On Wed, 11 Nov 2026 19:19 -0800, you wrote to me:
Most stone age software cannot display UTF-8.Sure, but they could convert to a charset/encoding that they can display.
Unfortunately they cannot. Some software is closed source and is not updated, other can only be built with BP7 which doesn't have a library for reading UTF-8, and UTF-8 is not a simple charset that can be converted to a 8-bit charset using classic xlat table.
GoldED is just an example and it's not a problem to replace it. Real problem is the lack of UTF-8 support in old BBS software for DOS like Tornado, RA, EleBBS, Maximus, etc. People running it for retro stuff,
not for progress.
And there are active users who read and post new messages from such systems. Won't be a huge loss for the whole network of corse,
but the quesion is why breaking something that works well for no
reason?
and being unable to properly see the o with umlaut in Bj├?rn
Felten's name.
It's not a problem even for an old GoldED with a proper xlat config.
No one says it's a bad thing. Bad thing would be to post
messages in UTF-8 for no reason and break systems that cannot
display it properly while having no issues with displaying
CP866.
| Sysop: | Daphantom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Washington, IL. |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:37:07 |
| Calls: | 31 |
| Files: | 21,932 |
| D/L today: |
56 files (9,999K bytes) |
| Messages: | 26,289 |