On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 11:26:05AM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote: > Anyway, I don't insist that xfonts-base should not include so many > ISO-8859-1 fonts. I just insisted xfonts-base should add one font > from each encoding, besides its current contents. I think this is > a good compromise between people who need Latin-9 fonts and people > who need other fonts under the situation that xfonts-base should not > be too big. I don't think this will work because most XLFD font requests at least manage to include the family field. Therefore requests for any other family will fail, or return a font in the wrong encoding, which fails to solve the problem you're trying to solve. > The only way to solve "I need plenty of Latin-9 fonts but I don't > want to install other fonts" problem is to supply separate packages > for all encodings (xfonts-iso8859-1, xfonts-iso-8859-2, xfonts-koi8-r, > xfonts-jisx0208, ...) but I think this idea is stupid. I agree. > It is true that I think the current situation of XFree86 and so on > is ISO-8859-1-centrism. I think you're 100% wrong with respect to XFree86 itself. Markus Kuhn, Juliusz Chroboczek, Bruno Haible, Ivan Pascal, and a number of other folks have been working very hard for the past few years to get decent, modern i18n support into the X Window System codebase. See, for example, <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/unicode.html>. The main problem is all the weird oddball software in the world can't be converted to Unicode overnight. -- G. Branden Robinson | The only way to get rid of a Debian GNU/Linux | temptation is to yield to it. branden@debian.org | -- Oscar Wilde http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpjdRDbz0nRD.pgp
Description: PGP signature