<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 29/07/2025 à 18:33, Steffen Nurpmeso
a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20250729163343.vhb0POXw@steffen%25sdaoden.eu">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">bonjour,</pre>
</blockquote>
:)
<pre class="tw-data-text tw-text-large tw-ta"
data-placeholder="Traduction" id="tw-target-text"
style="text-align:left" aria-label="Texte traduit : Buona notte"
data-ved="2ahUKEwi5tKfEkuOOAxV7VKQEHf_QFxgQ3ewLegQICRAU"><span
class="Y2IQFc" lang="it">Buona notte,</span></pre>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20250729163343.vhb0POXw@steffen%25sdaoden.eu">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
I see you meant it "beyond GPG", but in general.
Here: as above, certain characters are not allowed in email
protocols, and, as far as i see that, i do not think that will
change. So "anything binary", it will need an encoding.</pre>
</blockquote>
there is a difference between a 33%-37% overhead because ALL is
encoded, and 2 to 10 characters that have to be escaped...
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20250729163343.vhb0POXw@steffen%25sdaoden.eu">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
Fun fact. The MUA i maintain still sends (in the released
version) anything 8-bit over SMTP .. without using the according
SMTP extension. It does so for way over twenty years, and the
program was a bit famous by then (long before i took
maintainership). I never saw nor heard complaints.</pre>
</blockquote>
exactly... because the real fact is that email client are all
supporting 8bit MIME and UTF-8, that's why I'm sad to see still
base64 in thunderbird because they had some strange issue with
gpgME..... In fact, now, 99,9999999999% of server found on the
internet are just handling char as 8bit, and they don't even notice
that it's data... nobody do a "char & 0xEF" on every Byte he get
to be sure to use ASCII table... that's why other ISO-8859-15 like
encoding works.
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:20250729163343.vhb0POXw@steffen%25sdaoden.eu">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">
|so why do we still ENFORCE 7bit ascii for something that is no-where
|more used? do you know a single 7bit CPU still there?????
|
|if you can handle 8bits, you can handle 7bits... so leave the oldies
|rest in peace and move forward.
|
|base64, 7bit ascii, EBDICT, base32... quoted printable... are just
|oldies... they had their use, they are now just no more needed and
|belongs to history... you still use the old 5"1/4 floppy disk?
Certain people do the latter.
And i think you overcomplain a bit, because for example the
terrible but omnipresent XML and JSON do not support the full
spectrum too, you need a different kind of encoding to pass data
through them. (There are certain SMTP extensions to send binary
data though.) As i love (an unconstrained) email i find it unfair
to only complain on the very old (and misused) lady email, when
those "new" protocols/formats fail to deliver what you want?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I don't complain about the old lady, I only see that the old lady
will be abandoned because the people behind it are frozen... yes
xml did suck a lot enforcing base64 (even if in a way having
binary data in something that want to be human readable..... is
somewhat stupid) they could have just made some tag saying "binary
data start" and "binary data end" and let the "unicode compatible
text editor" display an hex dump if it wants</p>
<p>anyway, that's not the mater, the matter is that there is a bug
somewhere maybe in Thunderbird, maybe in gpgME, that prevented
Thunderbird to encode the attachments in 8bit MIME.... and I won't
say that Thunderbird's developpers reaction is the right one,
since they preferred to do a workaround instead of having the bug
fixed</p>
<p>best regards</p>
</body>
</html>