Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author: Frank da Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.utf8
>
> Step back a moment and consider that most terminal emulators are following
> the VT220 or VT320 specification, which comply scrupulously with ISO 4873,
> 2022, and 6249, in particular in their allocation of the C1 space for
> controls. When you put graphics in the C1 space, you break all of these
> good and law-abiding network citizens. For example, whatever "smart
> quote" or other gewgaw in Code Page Blah corresponds to the C1 DCS (or
> APC, OCS, etc) code hangs your session forever if you're not using a
> "new enhanced ISO terminal". Imagine the amount of confusion and
> frustration this can induce in users of current software, and the amount
> of extra labor among support personnel to unwedge their sessions.
>
Almost noone uses C1 control codes except via the <ESC><G0> mechanism.
I don't really think it is as serious a problem as you make it out,
and this is a genuine need for people ... as much as it perhaps sucks.
Personally I find the capability to put graphics characters in C1
space *if required to interoperate with a legacy charset* perfectly
acceptable for this reason.
Incidentally, I notice that the ISO-IR have both Latin-9 as well as
"Latin-1 alternative with Euro Sign" (� -> � only, otherwise the
same as Latin-1.)
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
