Tony Mechelynck wrote: > Andrew Myers wrote: > >> What's the procedure for proposing new digraphs? There are a lot of >> useful math symbols that could use digraphs. >> >> -- Andrew >> > > "Digraphs are taken from the RFC1345 mnemonics". I don't know who is > responsible for proposing new versions of that RFC but I guess you're in the > wrong forum for that. > > You can implement new digraphs yourself by means of the ":dig[raphs]" > command. > If you have a whole bunch of it, you can put them in a script. Just be sure > that 'encoding' is correctly set when you source that script: most of those > math symbol digraphs will require 'encoding' to be set to UTF-8 or similar. > > If you already have such a script, you can post it, with an appropriate > description, in the "scripts" section of vim-online > http://vim.sourceforge.net/scripts/index.php I think it's a great idea for Vim to be compliant with RFC 1345, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't make it a better editor to support some additional digraphs not in the standard. Getting an RFC implemented for new digraphs is a highly painful process.
FYI, here are a few digraphs I had in mind: digraph [C 8847 digraph ]C 8848 digraph [- 8849 digraph ]- 8850 digraph [U 8851 digraph ]U 8852 digraph 0+ 8853 digraph 0- 8854 digraph 0* 8855 digraph 0/ 8856 digraph \|- 8866 digraph -\| 8867 digraph \|= 8871 digraph (< 9001 digraph >) 9002 digraph [[ 10214 digraph ]] 10215 -- Andrew --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
