On 19 Dec 2001, Dave Love wrote: > > There are UTF-8 locales in use (e.g., vi_VI), which do NOT have > > UTF-8 in their name, > > That looks like a bad example since, at least in glibc 2.2.4, the > locale is listed as `vi_VN.UTF-8'. That's fortunate, since Emacs uses > VISCII for the unqualified Vietnamese language environment. > (Similarly for Devanagari.
Will you accept 'fa_IR' as another example? roozbeh -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
