From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon May 28 09:13:09 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 28 May 2007 09:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HshqG-0001cZ-V9 for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 09:13:09 -0700 Received: from 25.mail-out.ovh.net ([213.186.37.103]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HshqD-0001cI-63 for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 28 May 2007 09:13:08 -0700 Received: (qmail 24769 invoked by uid 503); 28 May 2007 16:10:28 -0000 Received: (QMFILT: 1.0); 28 May 2007 16:10:28 -0000 Received: from b6.ovh.net (HELO mail84.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.56) by 25.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 28 May 2007 16:10:28 -0000 Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queue-out) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 28 May 2007 16:13:02 -0000 Received: from 46.12-225-89.dsl.completel.net (46.12-225-89.dsl.completel.net [89.225.12.46]) by ssl0.ovh.net (IMP) with HTTP for ; Mon, 28 May 2007 18:13:02 +0200 Message-ID: <1180368782.465aff8e4e5b9@ssl0.ovh.net> Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 18:13:02 +0200 From: m.kornig@sondal.net To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: lojban-beginners Digest V6 #83 References: <56746.127.0.0.1.1180337547.squirrel@squirtle.drak.net> In-Reply-To: <56746.127.0.0.1.1180337547.squirrel@squirtle.drak.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.6 X-Originating-IP: 89.225.12.46 X-Spam-Score: 0.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: 6 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 4752 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: m.kornig@sondal.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Selon pliny@ptelder.net: > You're on the right track in thinking the UTF-8 is the only quasi-sane way > to mix Latin and CJK type characters. It seems that we've solved the problem now using UTF-8 encoding. I don't know whether it's "sane" but it seems to work for Japanese and a few languages using Latin characters. > The actual probems you are seeing with this document could be coming from > a number of directions, however. Here's the short list: > > 1. Improper formatting in the text editor making the document. You might > be able to mitigate this by throwing the document at a validator. The most > popular is the venerable W3C validator at: http://validator.w3.org/ The document in question validates for XHTML 1.0 Strict Cheers, Martin