Hi,
At Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:57:53 +0100,
Markus Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Suggestion:
>
> Call the locale with the normal wcwidth behaviour
>
> ja.UTF-8
>
> and the traditional one (EUC backwards compatibility)
>
> ja.UTF-8@oldwidth
>
Good. In this way, users can choose preferable one.
However, I think the tradition of width will continue to
live for long years, because every texts and softwares in Japan
rely on the width. Thus, the name "old" is not very good.
> In the interest of simplicity and interoperability, we definitely
> shout avoid to introduce more than two wcwidth conventions.
More conventions will be needed because of confusing situation
of many conversion tables between Unicode and local encodings.
However, in locale mechanism, users can build width definition
and this problem will not be fatal. (For softwares which internally
has wcwidth-equivalents, this can be fatal problem.)
(Please note that you have no rights to force other people
to use your favorite wcwidth convention, nor to define other
people happy or unhappy. It is _I_, no other people, who
knows whether I am happy or not. -- I am saying about the
offensive subject of this thread. I don't understand why
you behave so provocative.)
---
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/
