[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...) |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Jan 2004 21:30:17 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
> > > My personal test is the `README test': I'd like `cat README' to
> > > always yield something appropriate even on a dumb terminal -- even
> > > if the README file is part of a Chinese package, and I'm reading it
> > > on my American computer (say at a university where the computer
> > > systems have to cater to a very diverse audience).
> > > As far as I know, basic Unicode doesn't do this correctly for CJK,
> > > though it apparently does for other character sets.
(me:)
> > That flatly contradicts the assertions of the Unicode Consortium.
> > They maintain that, in fact, your dumb terminal can use a font which
> > will be readable to everyone (who can read these languages in the
> > first place). So I'm skeptical of your claim.
> If I'm wrong because in fact they _have_ adequately addressed the points
> I raised above, I would be very glad!
> However most of the defenses of unicode in this respect that I've seen
> have boiled down to: (1) `you should be using the right font in the
> first place' (via some external configuration) or (2) `you should be
> using some out-of-band font/language specifier' (typically something
> like XML!)
No, as far as I know -- their claim is that I can manufacture a "dumb
terminal" and sell it China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan and the terminal
will have these properties for all users:
~ will be a Unicode terminal
~ won't rely on any control characters that suggest font changes
~ will use the same font in all locales --- one glyph per combining sequence.
~ if I cat a README, users will find it legible
~ it is unlikely that any user will say "hey, that's a really nice
font" and probable that most users will say "hey, that's a really
ugly font -- it doesn't look quite right"
Furthermore, the "Mark II" model of this terminal could operate in one
four modes (C*2, J, and K) in which case users would say:
~ "hey, that looks decent enough (for a dumb terminal) on nearly all
of my native-language text"
How's xterm doing, these days? And if these principles aren't lived
up to -- since he's been quite active in the free software community
including xterm -- perhaps we should formulate some questions for
Markus Kuhn. Let's (try to) drag in the experts if we have too :-)
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Spaces in filenames ... will come soon!, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Andrew Suffield, 2004/01/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Tom Lord, 2004/01/21
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Andrew Suffield, 2004/01/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Miles Bader, 2004/01/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Tom Lord, 2004/01/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Miles Bader, 2004/01/21
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...),
Tom Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Miles Bader, 2004/01/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification, Brian May, 2004/01/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Florian Weimer, 2004/01/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [semi-OT] Unicode / han unification (was Re: Spaces ...), Miles Bader, 2004/01/25
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Spaces in filenames ... will come soon!, Robert Anderson, 2004/01/15