>- you have to get used to the transcription: eg. ä is what you would
>transcribe as 'ya' into English. x is the Russian 'ch', that is
>generally transcribed as 'h'
>
>- Pmail tries a one-to-one transcription, but this is not always
>possible: The word sluzhba is transcribed as slu?ba, because it
>affords more than one letter.
>
>The second problem can partly be solved by using a East European
>codepage (Latin II). As it contains letters as accented c (English
>'ch') or accented s (English 'sh') you get a one-to-one
>transcription for most Cyrillic letters. But there are exceptions
>too: the letter 'shch' is still rendered by a question mark. (I
>wonder whether I am allowed to manipulate the conversion tables. I
>have not tried this yet. In a text message it would not matter to
>replace one by two characters...)
>
>Result: If I want to work further with these texts, I will have to
>convert them properly. That means to a codepage, that includes the
>same language, because all letters must have an equivalent. East
>European Windows to East European DOS or Russian unix to Russian
>DOS. But if I just want to read just one Russian email amidst a lot of
>Czech oder German ones the Pmail's automatic conversion does a good
>job.
>
>Arachne has not this capability. If I have the Latin I or Latin
>II fonts installed any Russian text display as garbage. Arachne on
>the other hand makes it possible to change font and keyboard mapping
>(and probably other features) with two keystrokes (one to load
>another font apm, one to return to the last page. This is very nice,
>too.
>
>Regards
>Christof Lange
In these examples, some Cyrillic letters are translated to already existing
letters of the Roman alphabet, or to characters, such as the question mark, that
already have a use. I was thinking of a code page that shows Cyrillic letters
as the actual Cyrillic letters, which I don't know how to show here, or if I
did, the people on this list wouldn't see them correctly.
