[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: \201 back again
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: \201 back again |
Date: |
Sat, 21 Sep 2002 00:54:04 +0300 |
> From: Karl Eichwalder <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 19:04:47 +0200
>
> > Here's the header I see on my system:
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
> >
> > This is perfectly valid, AFAICS.
>
> Maybe, some mail gateway did add those lines for you.
>
> But these lines were missing from the original posting -- RMS never
> ever bothers to add such stuff, I guess ;) :
Sorry, I now see that I looked at a wrong message, not the one you
had in mind.
Richard's message indeed shows \201 characters, but that's only
because they were present in the message itself:
(re-search-forward "[=C2=81=C2=AB=C2=81=C2=BB{}()]" nil t)
See those 0xC2 characters before each 8-bit Latin-9 code?
As for the encoding, it says this:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
So the question now is how come Richard's Emacs sent such a badly
encoded message, and why did it think it was in UTF-8 when in fact it
was in emacs-mule?
- \201 back again, Karl Eichwalder, 2002/09/07
- Re: \201 back again, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/09/20
- Re: \201 back again, Karl Eichwalder, 2002/09/20
- Re: \201 back again, ShengHuo ZHU, 2002/09/20
- Re: \201 back again,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: \201 back again, Karl Eichwalder, 2002/09/21
- Re: \201 back again, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/09/21
- Re: \201 back again, Karl Eichwalder, 2002/09/21
- Re: \201 back again, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/09/22
- Re: \201 back again, Stefan Monnier, 2002/09/22
- Re: \201 back again, Andreas Schwab, 2002/09/23
- Re: \201 back again, Richard Stallman, 2002/09/21