[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More Latin-9 input methods?
From: |
Kai Großjohann |
Subject: |
Re: More Latin-9 input methods? |
Date: |
Mon, 06 May 2002 11:58:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) Emacs/21.2.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> There are characters in Latin-1 that are missing from Latin-9, and
> vice versa. If there is only one input method, what should it do
> with these characters?
>
> Perhaps it could have a list of pairs of characters, each Latin-1-only
> character paired with one Latin-9-only character. Then there would be
> a sequence for each pair.
It might be difficult to pair them up. For example, the code point
for the latin-1 character that looks like "3/4" is the same as the
code point for the latin-9 character that looks like Y with two dots
on top. So one is a letter and the other is a nonletter.
Is it really a problem to have the duplication between Latin-1 and
Latin-9? In the long run (after Emacs changes to Unicode internally)
it would be good to make the distinction go away. But in the
meantime, Latin-1 and Latin-2 also share a lot of characters, yet
the input methods are separate.
kai
--
Silence is foo!
- More Latin-9 input methods?, Kai Großjohann, 2002/05/03
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/05/04
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Richard Stallman, 2002/05/04
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Kai Großjohann, 2002/05/05
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/05/05
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Richard Stallman, 2002/05/06
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?,
Kai Großjohann <=
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Richard Stallman, 2002/05/06
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Kai Großjohann, 2002/05/07
- Re: More Latin-9 input methods?, Eli Zaretskii, 2002/05/07