On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 01:06:13PM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote: > Depends on the balance between how far we should support non-Latin-1 > languages and the size of xfonts-base package. Yes, my idea will be > insufficient. However my idea will supply at least "fixed" font. > This is enough for terminal emulators. Per X font policy, the "fixed" name (as any alias name) is permitted to reference one and only one font. I don't see how your proposal helps people requesting "fixed" at all... > Now my above idea is just a suggestion. Now my opinion is that > it is a bad idea for xfonts-base to include all of Latin-9 fonts > (if you were to do it, _you_ would be blamed for Latin-1/9-centrism). I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that I'm going to be blamed for <insert gripe here>-centrism no matter what I do. I'm just trying to balance the competing needs of Debian's very diverse group of users. If you think having to install xfonts-base-transcoded is a pain, consider the situation when potato was released, when those fonts weren't available *at all* in most of the encodings they currently are. > > > 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. > > Well, you are right, Unicode support of XFree86 is now under > development. However, you are forgetting about X11R5/X11R6 > internationalization efforts. No, I'm not. You're the one accusing people of "ISO-8859-1-centrism". If you want to cite historical facts to undermine your own thesis, be my guest. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | // // // / / branden@debian.org | EI 'AANIIGOO 'AHOOT'E http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpQjgot8CEob.pgp
Description: PGP signature