On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, Dave Mielke wrote: > [quoted lines by Daniel Dalton on 2008/03/22 at 11:36 +1100] > >>> brltty to be unicode-based became more important. We'll get back to it, >>> though. >> >> I know this is a stupid question, but > > I don't believe there's any such thing as a stupid question. If any of us > doesn't know something then it's always best to ask.
Thanks. >> what does this mean? > > Brltty has historically always used eight-bit characters so it always had to > be > aware of the current host character set. This has become very limiting, > expecially since modern operating systems maintain the screen content in > Unicode. Unicode is a large character set which essentially includes every > single character ever used in all languages. Linux has progressed far enough > that it's even now not even possible to accurately back-translate what's on > the > screen to the host character set. The only truly reliable way for brltty to > show you what's on the screen, therefore, is for it to work with unicode > characters rather than host characters. I see. Thanks for explaining that. I'll do some more research as well. -- Daniel Dalton http://members.iinet.net.au/~ddalton/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ This message was sent via the BRLTTY mailing list. To post a message, send an e-mail to: [email protected] For general information, go to: http://mielke.cc/mailman/listinfo/brltty
