Vlad, 

I've stepped through the debugger to isolate the following problem and it 
*is* in your code.  The smart quotes are getting removed (on NT) by the 
try_UtoNative() call inside your s_AbiWord_1_Listener::_outputData() 
implementation.  To reproduce this, try linking with the version of libiconv 
we ship.  

I'm open to suggestions as to what the correct behavior here should be.  
According to the current stew of ifdefs in that function, there are (at 
least) three different approaches we could choose for non-us-ascii 
characters:  

1.  convert them into numeric entities (Jeff's original choice)
2.  convert to UTF8  (the fallback he didn't choose)
3.  remap some subset of them to native encodings

Note that since #1 is a strict subset of #2, both can get by without 
declaring an explicit encoding in the XML header.  

Could you explain again why you want to change the encoding at export time 
(ie #3)?  It feels like a brittle / lossy operation -- in this instance at 
least.  I can't speak for other platforms or locales, but on Windows for 
Latin-1 locales (at minimum), I highly doubt that we want *any* such 
remapping at export time. 

Thanks,
Paul

PS:  Bill, I'm pretty sure that this is also the root cause of my problems 
with contractions.  If not, I'll let you know.


At 01:23 PM 2/22/01 -0800, WJCarpenter wrote:
>paul> 3.  Something's goofy on export.
>paul> -------------------------------- Make a new document.  Type in
>paul> your favorite contraction with Smart Quotes on.  The
>paul> single-quote gets replaced with a curly glyph (in Times New
>paul> Roman).  Save and reload the document.  Now you get a different
>paul> glyph (still TNR, but straighter).  Huh?
>
>I *can* repro this on win32, with single or double quote marks, but
>I'm pretty sure it's a im/ex problem and not a smart quote problem.
>(The problem still occurs if you turn smart quotes off.)  On win32 to
>repro the problem, just save either of Paul's or Vlad's examples into
>"sq.abw", open it, see the glyphs correctly, save as "sq1.abw", open
>that, and see the glyphs incorrectly.  (You can also see that they're
>different things in the *.abw files.)


Reply via email to