Talk:8-bit clean

SMTP and NNTP section
The first paragraph unter "SMTP and NNTP 8-bit cleanness" is not worth to be here in Wikipedia. There are no sources, it is rather written like a political speech than like a Wikipedia article and so I think it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.16.74.3 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 23 June 2010


 * The whole section is borderline incoherent original research that does not appear to be relevant. I can find no relevant mention of these issues (that people believe them to not be clean but they actually are) outside of unreliable mailing lists and fora. The first part of the article is far better - being meaningful and relevant. I see no reason why this section should be kept as it is. Any attempts to improve it would do better starting from scratch. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 14:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * OrangeDog, I'm sure you mean well. But I am uncomfortable with deleting the only section in the article with any references, leaving the article without any references.
 * In accordance with the suggestions in Don't hope the house will build itself as well as WP:DEMOLISH,
 * I restored that section, added a few more references, and heavily edited it. --DavidCary (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Objections to "just send 8" - who, why, when?

 * In the mid-1990s, people objected to "just send 8 bits (to SMTP servers)", perhaps because of a perception that "just send 8 bits" is an implicit declaration that ISO 8859-1 become the new "standard encoding", forcing everyone in the world to use the same character set.

Who are these people, what were in fact their specific objections, why 8859-1 in particular, and where are the citations? "Perhaps" is not good enough for an encyclopaedia! Hairy Dude (talk) 23:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Please, look exactly to references given: 4) Politics. Whether or not it is stated as such, "just send 8-bits" is perceived in certain areas of the world as a declaration that the "Internet Standard Character Set" is being changed from US-ASCII to ISO-8859-1. There are vehement objections to this.  Some folks even base their objections to Unicode on the (incorrect) perception that Unicode declares ISO-8859-1 as a "base level" and thus gives a perceived unfair advantage to Western Europe.
 * That being said, my main problem with the "just send 8-bit" argument is that ties you to only one character set, and that's a bad thing....
 * Sadly, there are many Wikipedians willingly inserting various or and who instead of looking to the sources (which are specified) and improving a wording. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 11:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * There are three separate issues:
 * Whether to send 8-bit data without a charset on the Content-Type
 * Whether to send 8-bit data without a Content-Transfer-Encoding that specifies an 8-bit mechanism (8bit, binary)
 * Whether to send 8-bit data using a transport mechanism that doesn't support it, or without specifying that such support should be enabled. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * 8bc514a23dc07db4a810ca2d07bfbec8 Mdjuyel1234 (talk) 06:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

SMTPUTF8
Should this article discuss SMTPUTF8, documented in ? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:19, 11 November 2020 (UTC)


 * That seems to be more closely associated with UTF-8 or [[SMTP]

Definition
Currently, the definition is hidden in section. Can it be moved to the lede? ◅ Sebastian 06:43, 11 August 2023 (UTC)