> I think Edward states that this is his opinion. I would also love to see > all of Unicode 4.1 supported > on the Linux console. However it looks difficult to get someone with those > two incompatible(?) skills, Linux kernel programming and love for > linguistics...
Quite often there are various people wanting to make linux available in their own languages. There are various linux-user-groups (for example for myanmar, khmer, indic scripts and so on...) But it seems like they get lost. I think because of lack of organization and cooperation. It has to be a cooperative effort in order to get full support in one implementation. As we have stated, noone can possible know everything about all the scripts in the world, as well as knowing kernel programming, and have the time to do all this work. So the the implementation of each script should preferably be done by native speakers of the various languages. But the work has to be coordinated in some way. Another question: What is the use of the concept of "four console character cells", "double cell width" etc.. for scripts that have various cellwidths? (like burmese) ShouldnÂt one cell always be large enough to fit the char? IsnÂt it better to always put one character into one cell, and instead increase or decrease the cell width? I guess that is what the concept of cells are used for... I mean there is no use to have multiple cells for one char. It is like selecting the left part of an "M" or the rigth part of an "Z". Why would one like to do something like that? By the way, I think the burmese script is the most beautiful and elegant script in the world. And it would be wonderful if it could be used in linux terminals. Not only because of its eastethic features but I think also it would be important for the connectivity and development in Myanmar. And increased connectivity could have many other possitive effects for that country for many reasons. Martin -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
