ehird wrote: > 2009/3/19 Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com>: >> I thought the rules contained an English-centric clause at the time, but >> http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2005-December/002501.html >> >> (the last SLR before CFJ 1580) says otherwise. Â Accordingly, I'll remove >> this latest attempt from the DB later tonight, unless someone mounts a >> convincing argument in favor of overturning precedent. >> >> Proto-proto: Â Explicitly recognize base64-encoded messages during >> February (the month in which RFCs 989 and 1421 were published). >> > > The recent Spanish/Unicode incidents, IMO, provide strong evidence > that this precedent no longer exists.
Both of those cases are fairly evident to the naked eye. Contrast http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2003-April/001309.html from CFJ 1460. I would express the standard as follows: If a) it can be understood based solely on a typical player's i) knowledge of eir native language (in Agora, English has always been typical) and ii) common sense (for upside-down text and arguably cognates), or if b) i) it's accompanied by a plaintext "this is X" hint and ii) it's reasonably easy to find a reliable automatic translator from X to plaintext, then it's reasonably unambiguous wrt language. Otherwise, it isn't. HTML and base64 both satisfy b). Turkish fails the "reliable" part of b) ii).
