On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 01:26:33PM +0900, Gaspar Sinai wrote:
I just browsed through RFC-3010 and I found one thing that
bothers me and it has not been discussed yet (I think).
RFC says:
The NFS version 4 protocol does not mandate the use
Kaixo!
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 03:10:32AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
One thing that's bound to be lost in the transition to UTF-8 filenames:
the ability to reference any file on the filesystem with a pure CLI.
If I see a file with a pi symbol in it, I simply can't type that; I have
to copy
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:08:24AM +0100, Radovan Garabik wrote:
One thing that's bound to be lost in the transition to UTF-8 filenames:
the ability to reference any file on the filesystem with a pure CLI.
If I see a file with a pi symbol in it, I simply can't type that; I have
to copy
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:23:20AM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
I'm not even convinced that it's a good idea to force file names to be
in UTF-8. Perhaps it would be simpler and more robust to let file
names be any null-terminated string of octets and just recommend that
people use
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:59:14AM +0100, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:
It isn't that much of a problem.
I think it's not a completely trivial loss, compared to an ASCII environment
where filenames were completely unambiguous (invalid characters being
escaped.) There doesn't seem to be any obvious
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:23:20AM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
People are advocating normalisation as a solution for various kinds of
file name confusion, but I can imagine normalisation making things
worse.
For example, file names with a trailing space can certainly be
confusing,
Kaixo!
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 06:50:27AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 11:59:14AM +0100, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:
It isn't that much of a problem.
I think it's not a completely trivial loss, compared to an ASCII environment
where filenames were completely unambiguous
On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 02:24:31AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
Hi,
At Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:36:57 +0100,
Keld J\370rn Simonsen wrote:
I can type ¦ and ð directly from the keyboard with my standard
X danish keyboard, just as easlily as I can type @. Cant you?
If this is still a
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 05:34:29PM +, Markus Kuhn wrote:
Keld wrote on 2002-02-21 16:36 UTC:
I can type ¦ and ð directly from the keyboard with my standard
X danish keyboard
I'm glad to hear that you are one of the ~12 people in Europe who know
how to enter ¦ under XFree86 directly
Keld Simonsen wrote:
How do we fix this in the keyboard standards and how do we get the fix
onto the market? Any suggestions?
It is really hard to get something done. What we can do is something
with X. Getting the physical layout is much harder. Unless you
want to split the keyboard and
By the way, to all of the people threading on inputting other language
text: I was showing a loss from ASCII--you can't type all filenames
because some of them will have characters you can't necessarily type.
This was a minor point, since (as I've said) it can't really be fixed.
(Well, it could
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 09:54:24PM +, Markus Kuhn wrote:
Keld Simonsen wrote:
How do we fix this in the keyboard standards and how do we get the fix
onto the market? Any suggestions?
It is really hard to get something done. What we can do is something
with X. Getting the
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 05:36:44PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
By the way, to all of the people threading on inputting other language
text: I was showing a loss from ASCII--you can't type all filenames
because some of them will have characters you can't necessarily type.
This was a minor
I see some requirements on X in Radovans posting:
We need some general assignments of control keys across the
different keyboards, such as what is meta on a 101 keyboard, 104,
105. And is it doable? I think it is with current X architecture.
Are the keys bound in the standard configuration?
Kaixo!
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 05:36:23PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
OTOH, the unprinting character problem is important. Would it be
reasonable to escape (\u) characters with wcwidth(c)==0 (in tool output,
ie ls -b), or is there some reasonable use of them in filenames?
There are
On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 12:55:31AM +0100, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:
OTOH, the unprinting character problem is important. Would it be
reasonable to escape (\u) characters with wcwidth(c)==0 (in tool output,
ie ls -b), or is there some reasonable use of them in filenames?
There are reasonable
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, David Starner wrote:
Software being too smart is usually a pain, unless they've got the
read-my-mind code working right. Especially here - how do you
distinguish between the hyphen, the em-dash, the minus and the soft
hyphen? Any sort of software-smarts is going to have
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 09:49:01PM -0500, Henry Spencer wrote:
No question there, but I think you have missed my point. The most crucial
step is simply to get people to realize that there is more than one symbol
involved and that the choice matters. So long as hitting the - key always
gets
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 09:49:01PM -0500, Henry Spencer wrote:
There is a step between shift-alt-meta and printed on the keycaps. An
English (non-programmers) keyboard could be designed and distributed
in software. It's not impossible that Microsoft could support such a
thing and keyboard
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:09:20PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
Would you add separate open double quote, close double quote,
open single quote, close single quote, neutral single and double quotes,
apostrophe and backtick keys, too? They're all useful, but
that's one heck of a keyboard. :)
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Glenn Maynard wrote:
...Having them grumble that
the stupid software keeps picking the wrong one would be an *IMPROVEMENT*.
When they're visibly very similar, do you think most users are going to
use them right, no matter how accessible they are?
Possibly not. But
21 matches
Mail list logo
