Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎.
On Sun 28 Jul 2019 at 12:20:51 (-0400), Michael Stone wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 11:01:33AM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > No, particularly in a technical list like this. Most people reading
> > posts as text emails will lack it in their font, so it will
> > probably get displayed as a space, or even something double-width
> > that screws up any intended monospaced layout.
>
> Most people running an up to date debian system shouldn't really have
> problems with it. Terminal choice can be an issue, but there are
> plenty of terminals available which will display a text MUA and
> unicode emojis (even in color!) with no problem.
I had assumed the problem was with fonts rather than terminals.
But I'm happy for you to name some terminal/font combinations that
will work. I hope that at least one of these is VC-based, whatever
"terminal" means in that context.
That said, my own view is that characters from this supplementary
plane are unlikely to be satisfactory for a significant number of
people, so it's polite to avoid using them.
> > But the main point for you, personally, is that your system for
> > sending posts appears to be non-conforming and embeds NULs or 0x80
> > characters in the text. This mightily screws up some mail readers,
> > so please don't use it.
>
> This is the issue--what he's sending isn't valid unicode because his
> pre-unicode (and pre-rfc2822) MUA is mangling its input and sending
> bogus output. It has nothing to do with whether sending valid unicode
> works.
That's why I posted here a recipe for the OP to cut and paste the
Message-ID untouched from a given message into the OP's reply, and
then change Message-ID to In-Reply-To. It appears to work ok.
I've frequently done this when I've replied to a post that I'd already
deleted. (I don't bother with copying all the references.)
I don't think it's possible for the OP to post Unicode correctly
because their MUA appears unable to construct a Content-Type header.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: