[Mailman-i18n] [Mailman-Users] Mailman and UTF8

[Jan Kohnert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mark Sapiro schrieb:
> Jan Kohnert wrote:
>>
>>So I found out, I have to encode the german mailman.po file in UTF-8 and
>>then rebuild the *.mo out of it. Now it works, so I can provide this
>>version (to large for this list to attach it). (Mailman 2.1.9_rc1).
>
>
> I18n issues like the above are better discussed on the mailman-i18n
> list <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-i18n>.

Agreed, so I'm crossposting this one for References in the I18N list.
Followups please on that list.

>>But there is one (small) thing left:
>>If you look in [1] you will notice one incorrectly displayed character
>>(the ---next part---, in German ---n=E4chster Teil--- does not work in
>> all
>>cases ([1] does not work, [2] does), altough all my editors say, the
>>umlaut is correctly declared...
>
>
> It looks like in [1] somehow the utf-8 encoded message got interpreted
> as some other character set (maybe iso-8859-1) and then got encoded
> again as utf-8 so that instead if the a with umlaut, you see the bytes
> of the utf-8 encoding of a with umulaut displayed as characters.
>
> This may be a scrubber issue of some kind, but I am not sure why it
> would occur with only one of two apparently structurally identical
> messages from the same poster, but here is a clue.
>
> I looked at the text file
> <https://secure.the-pojs.dyndns.org/pipermail/pojs-discussion/2006-November.txt>.
> While there are no Content-Type: headers in that file, I can see the
> encoding of the Subject: header. It appears that the 'bad' posts are
> 'original' posts and are iso-8859-1 encoded by the poster's (you) MUA,
> and the 'good' posts are 'replies' and are utf-8 encoded by the MUA.
>
> Thus it appears that there may be a scrubber issue when the character
> set of the incoming message is iso-8859-1 but the i18n translated
> canned messages are utf-8.
>
> What mailman version is this?

Leaving your comment completely in heare for reference; as said above,
this is v2.1.9.

Regards Jan


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFZZ+3ZRp6KEAo/3oRArw/AJ4qn1yjvFmwvYJbZO3e1bgqTadMrgCgsXDO
2sdRW2NP8u6cwQj4GK21/Gw=
=peRZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----