Hi,
At Fri, 9 Feb 2001 00:59:45 +0330 (IRT),
Roozbeh Pournader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have followed the discussion here from the beginning. But I still cannot
> get your point. I agree that every locale, will need it's own font. But
> would you please note that you expect so much from plain text?
>
> Would you please tell us your definition of plain text?
The following will give the concept of plain text, though it is not
a definition.
http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/2001-02/msg00140.html
[Tomohiro]
>>> Plain text can be dirty but cannot be wrong.
>> Dirty?
>
> For example, plain text doesn't have information on typeface.
> Thus, XTerm can display A-M using Roman and N-Z using Italic
> and it is not wrong, though it is "dirty". However, confusing
> - Latin and Greek letters
> - "Morning" and "Morgen"
> - Chinese and Japanese letters
> are wrong.
Another point of your opinion.
> I agree that every locale, will need it's own font.
If the "locale" means the usual meaning, i.e., LANG variable and so on,
it is not a good way. For example, A Japanese user may read Chinese
plain text. A text file may include multiple languages. Thus I think
text file itself has to have information on languages.
Thus, Markus' "language tag" solution is good.
---
Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://surfchem0.riken.go.jp/~kubota/
"Introduction to I18N"
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
