lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: UTF-8, OSTA-UDF [why?], Unicode, and miscellaneous gibberish
    On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Erik Corry wrote:

    > Unicode is regularly extended, and is incredibly complete in

    ...by a commitee. And they don't release free implementation of
    it or updates to existing ones after that.

    > the area of Japanese characters (which I know a little
    > about). I am sure it is/could be as complete for Chinese.
    > There are even private areas for your own extensions. What
    > more could you want?

    Japanese and Chinese characters encoding that Japanese and Chinese people
    use, perhaps?

    [skipped]

    > Linux has already standardised on UTF-8 for the console.

    (looking at the console...) No, still looks like koi8-r for me... Having
    the internal support doesn't mean that it's usable enough to make it
    mandatory everywhere.

    > The
    > suggestion of converting all file systems to a single
    > encoding is probably a useful one, and should probably
    > available as a (default?) mount option.

    It should be possible to _choose_ mapping as the mount option, not
    "UTF-8 or all filenames will be truncated to the first letter because
    second one is zero".

    > > This is _JUST_ for 16bit+ filesystems. Not 8bit filesystems like ext2 or
    > > the like.
    >
    > As far as I understood, ext2 had already been standardised on UTF-8.
    > Of course most (all?) of the effects of this decision take place
    > in user space, so people are free to do something else if they really
    > want to. Especially people who prefer an 8-bit standard (no '/' issue).

    I'm not aware of any development of Unicode-using tools. And unless
    sh / bash / grep / awk /... will work with UTF-8 as with native characters
    (that means, variable-length-encoded character is treated as one
    character, and what I don't think, anyone will make any soon), no one will
    use it for anything decent. If I wanted to use a sysatem with cryptic text
    processing in library and no text utilities for scripts, I'd used NT.

    > Even without a big discussion on linux-kernel. Hint, hint.

    There was big discussion in FTP-WG ML already -- even though two people
    who were the only non-iso8859-1-native ones, disagreed, look at their
    "wonderful" i18n draft with "UTF-8, or we will guess the encoding by the
    content, and if yours one happens to look like valid UTF-8, you lose!"
    attitude.

    --
    Alex


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.044 / U:0.172 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site