Bug#99933: second attempt at more comprehensive unicode policy
On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 23:05, David Starner wrote:
> Not anything written up that I know of. Debian-i18n has a large cross
> membership, which was part of the reason this should be on debian-i18n.
Ok, if people want to move this discussion that's fine by me.
> >Are you saying that programs should attempt to convert filenames back
> >into the user's locale encoding in the actual filesystem, or just that
> >they should recode them for output?
>
> Console programs should not recode them period, except possibly for
> annoying stuff (newlines in names and the like).
If we're talking about the filenames, then I agree.
> Locale-dependent
> GUI programs should probably do the same. GNOME and KDE may
> save them as UTF-8, but that's questionable behavior; arguably, if you
> want to use GNOME and KDE you should be using a UTF-8 locale, which
> would solve the inconsistency.
What do you expect GNOME programs to do? Since they fully support
UTF-8, you can input any Unicode character you want. Also, a program
like Evolution may receive a file in mail whose name uses Unicode
characters. And a lot of locale charsets (like ISO-8859-1) will not be
able to encode the string. The only sane solution is to just use UTF-8
for filenames.
But I am curious about your feelings on programs writing data in general
to the terminal; you feel they should not never to convert it to the
locale's charset, and we should just mandate that people using legacy
terminals use that filterm or whatever thing?
Reply to: