For the record, I second Junichi's POV.
On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 02:59:25PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > >> (1) Please change Japanses encoding from eucJP to utf8
> > >>
> > >> Wrong : $charset{'ja'}="euc-jp";
> > >> Correct : $charset{'ja'}="utf8"; or just delete right?
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this correct ?
> > >
> > > Translator's view: EUC-JP is fine.
> >
> > All the same, UTF-8 is the standard, so we translators should be
> > using it or working towards it, don't you think?
>
> Changing the mail interface from EUC-JP to UTF-8 is still disruptive
> to daily operation. It might be an idea for the longer term, but it
> doesn't have to happen right now.
This may be non-issue already.
As I read the web documentation on mail interface, it already seems the
user can chose encoding of his choice by sending encoding explicitly.
Like ja.UTF-8 instead of ja. Web interface is UTF-8 or any if you have
good browser anyway. (Somehow, I have not got reply mail yet from DDTP
to which I sent for testing mail.)
I have some idea for smooth transition. The transition data is sent out
as gzipped attachment file with extention such as
data-<packagename>.utf-8.gz if that does not destruct many. This is
safer.
The main text should tell easy way to open it with popular editor under
any configuration, e.g.,
$ vim "+:e ++enc=utf-8 data-<packagename>.utf-8.gz"
Emacs example may be helpful.
> On the other hand, the translation data fed to apt, apt already
> expects it to be utf-8, and we're feeding it EUC-JP, which is
> completely broken right now.
I agree. We should serve UTF-8 data for this. We have control over how
they are used and it has been UTF-8 as I understand.
Osamu
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature