From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 5 14:43:41 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from news-ma.rhein-neckar.de (news-ma.rhein-neckar.de [193.197.90.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A9737BA1E for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 14:43:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from daemon@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de) Received: from bigeye.rhein-neckar.de (uucp@localhost) by news-ma.rhein-neckar.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with bsmtp id XAA11377 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 23:43:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from daemon@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by bigeye.rhein-neckar.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA94631 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 23:38:33 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from daemon) From: naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de (Christian Weisgerber) Subject: Re: Unicode on FreeBSD Date: 5 Apr 2000 23:38:32 +0200 Message-ID: <8cgboo$2scu$1@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de> References: <3.0.6.32.20000404100544.00882db0@mail85.pair.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Alex Belits wrote: > People with genuine i18n needs such as linguists or people with genuine > i18n needs such as non-English users? Linguists don't see Unicode as being > sufficient, Linguists are interested in languages, not in computer character set issues. They are just users who expect their *applications* to work. They don't know and don't want to know about arcane things such as the current mess of 8-bit character sets and MIME. (Well, not being a linguist myself that's certainly the impression I get from sci.lang.) Unicode certainly *is* sufficient as a character repertoire since it aims to include all the scripts in the world. This goal hasn't been achieved yet, but for some time now Unicode has been expanding into areas where *no* previous character sets have existed at all. > and everyone else uses local encodings/charsets. I'm not a linguist and I want Unicode. By yesterday. > However I oppose: > > 1. The point of view that Unicode is the only possible or the best > possible way to handle multilingual documents. > > 2. The point of view that support of Unicode should be made at the expense > of compatibility with everything else, or by the introduction of some > unsafe guesswork such as application of UTF-8 validity check to determine > if the chunk of data is in UTF-8 or not. Wonderful. You are pretty much in agreement with Unicode supporters all over the world. You are arguing against a non-existent opponent. It's boring. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message