[Scspamcop] Re: Internationalize SC reports - a little bit...?

[WazoO]

"Patto" <nobody at devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:f19mao$j59$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> WazoO wrote:
> > ...
> > As stated above, it's not like the e-mail just sits there waiting to
> > be tossed out 'directly' .... it's actually grabbed, stored, manuplated,
> > handled, processed, etc. by a number of tools, not all of which can or
> > are configured to handle every character-set under the sun ....
>
> Thanks for your reply and explanation. I don't know in what code SC is
> written. Most modern languages have string-handling functions that allow
> multi-byte strings, and those would (normally) handle "every
> character-set under the sun". This is an effort that would need to be
> done once; replace the single-byte capable string functions with
> multi-byte capable ones. And then there is of course the encoding of the
> outgoing report that needs to be the same as the incoming spam message.

There's languages, then there's applications, tools, scripting,  ....

I've been 'fighting' this for a number of months now in the Forum, Wiki,
etc.
One of the primary issues there has turned out to the implemntation of
AJAX, through the use of some javascript ... which then runs into the
character-set issues of the server, database, and as it turns out, even the
user's browser settings ....  actually, a bit of a nightmare ,,,,

> The question is whether or not SC is willing to provide the *original*
> message to the recipients. I do not work at an abuse desk, so I don't
> know how important it is to see the original spam. I just imagine that I
> would rather see the original message than a page full of question marks.

I am not speaking for the IronPort programmers at all ... hey, I have no
doubt they're getting paid a heck of a lot more than I get from doing
the volunteer thing, but ....