Thanks - you're the only person who has reinforced my
periodic comments that the I18N for the stuff in the
'simple text' email notifications is a nice juicy
problem - since IPP and most (or all?) shipping IPP
Printer implementations define support for multiple
human languages and charsets.
And the fact that a client can ask for a notification
in some other charset than UTF-8 further complicates
I18N, because the obvious starting point (message
catalogs in UTF-8) leads to smashed characters in
many local charsets.
I think the IPP 'mailto:' notification method should
be a good deal more complete on this I18N topic.
- Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Xerox and Sharp
High North Inc
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2000 8:21 AM
Cc: David_Kellerman@nls.com; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM -
TheIPPNotification I-Ds will now go the IESG)]
Frankly, the bigger problem with this stuff is i18n support for the text.
But that's a different topic.
IMO the supposed difference between simple text and a structured report is a
chimera. Email support in general is another matter, of course.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 18 2000 - 21:34:51 EDT