Re: debconf w/ charset encoding support
Hi,
At Wed, 18 Sep 2002 11:20:47 -0400,
Joey Hess wrote:
> I really don't want to. The encoding is indeed unspecified. Putting on
> such a nasty bandaid that may not even work in all cases is not
> appealing when we can just fix it all for sarge.
I agree that it is not very beautiful solution, but it works almost well.
Though the encoding is not explicitly specified, as Junichi pointed out,
the existance of popular (and de-facto) encoding for each language and
country is firm --- this is why debconf and manpages (yes, manpages also
have the same "implicit encoding" problem!) works well until a few people
recently complain about debconf's encoding conversion.
Thus, implicit popular and de-facto encoding *exists*. Please don't
hesitate to document and implement it.
I understand that we should not rely on the implicit encodings, because
it may change in future. Thus, I think it is a good idea to encourage
(or, force) translators to specify encodings explicitly when new debconf
will become tested and stable. Support of implicit encodings should be
limited to old packages (i.e., all packages which exist now). (This can
be achieved by modifying debhelper to output errors when encoding is not
specified in debconf templates in source packages.)
---
Tomohiro KUBOTA <kubota@debian.org>
http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/
"Introduction to I18N" http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/
Reply to: