> On Dec 23, 2015, at 7:58 AM, Mateusz Viste <mate...@viste.fr> wrote:
> 
> On 23/12/2015 13:38, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. wrote:
>>> Japanese - Nobody.
>>> Russian - Nobody.
>>> Chinese - Nobody.
>> 
>> I thought there was a standard and completely acceptable practice
>> for representing these languages using the standard Western DOS
>> Latin based font that was put into place at the dawn of the PC age.
> 
> I don't know about asian languages, but for russian it would be a heresy 
> to do so. Yes, there exists an informal "latin" equivalent way to write 
> russian, but it was never intended to be used by Russian users, it's 
> rather for western people to be able to vocalize (*very* approximately) 
> russian words and phrases.

You are probably correct with regards to Russian translation.

As for the Asian languages, I don’t know either. I thought that the latin
based representation of their written languages came about do due
the two main issues. The limited character set capabilities of the Operating
Systems and writing directions of the written languages. So, more or less,
I came down to: Ok, you want to use computers too. Make your language 
work with the hardware. 

Assuming, that my poor knowledge of computer history is even remotely
accurate, I don’t know if is still acceptable to represent the Asian languages
using the DOS Latin font. Or, if it is considered offensive to translate their
languages that way in modern times.

> 
> As for actual russian users, there is CP866, and that's what shall be 
> used for DOS text interfaces.

So, Russian is probably out. Assuming that it is possible to do some code
page swapping on a running system, I don’t think Jim would want the additional
complexity added to FDI. 

Using the font tools I built for PGME and it’s Font Designer., it wouldn’t be 
very difficult to change the current DOS font. The tools already exist. This 
also assumes that the language could be represented accurately in a 8x?? 
size font and someone would create the font and translations. But again, I 
don’t think Jim would want the extra complexity.

> 
> Mateusz
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-devel mailing list
> Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
> 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Reply via email to