On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> Gaspar Sinai scripsit: > > > So it is perfectly ok? I can make a non-ebedded example too. > > I do not have time to make childish examples and screenshots > > to get through my point. I have a job to do and text processing > > is just my hobby. > > Mine too, but it's difficult to understand the merits of an > objection when no actual examples of the problem are given. So common language is screenshots... Ok. I updated the page. Now the exact same file is viewed with two different viewers at the bottom of this page: http://www.yudit.org/security/ I maintain my view that if there is no proven reversable logical-to-viewed/viewed-to-logical electronic signatures should be avoided. And the bottom line is: I don't really care if Unicode will admit that this is a problem. If my reasoning (not my screenshots) convince *some* people not to sign electronically unicode text I think I did those guys good - and that is enough satisfaction for me. Cheers gaspar
