Re: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Hi,
Some supplementations:
From: Tomohiro KUBOTA <debian@tmail.plala.or.jp>
Subject: Bug#215647: [patch] xterm 4.3.0-0pre1v3 i18n
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 07:58:40 +0900 (JST)
> 1. If you say "People using UTF-8 locales may have to use uxterm
> (or other special softwares) because the main software (xterm in
> this case) is not improved enough", then I may agree. However,
> in this case, improvement is very easily possible.
I am saying about my patch.
> 2. UTF-8 is only one of many locales. How about other locales
> like EUC-JP, ISO-8859-11, KOI8-R, and so on so on? Do people
> using EUC-JP locales should use "eucjpxterm"? Do people using
> ISO-8859-13 locales should use "iso885913xterm"?
In your idea, "iso885913xterm" is not needed but EUC-JP is ignored.
> 3. There are already a standardized way called "locale" for users
> to set only one (or a few) variable(s) such as LANG, LC_ALL,
> LC_MESSAGES, LC_CTYPE to order all softwares (including xterm)
> to follow it. In well-i18n-ed situation, all that users have to
> do is just to set LANG variable, and then all softwares respect
> it. Why do you ignore the standardized way even when it is easily
> implemented?
This is the main point. IMO, "uxterm" is an evil fork and a makeshift
until xterm itself will be improved enough. Or, it is a version for
people who don't know LANG variable or people who just want to
temporarily test UTF-8. However, if we were admit uxterm as a final
solution, we would have to accept UTF-8 variants for all softwares.
We would have to introduce uls, uwc, uperl, used, ugrep, and so on
so on. However, fortunately, original version of ls, wc, and so on
will respect locale and support UTF-8, so such an evil fork is avoided.
Anyway, I think your idea is useful for some softwares except xterm,
since xterm can be improved with easier patch (which I sent).
---
Tomohiro KUBOTA <kubota@debian.org>
http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/
Reply to: