Subject: Re: Unicode support in iso9660.
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Valeriy E. Ushakov <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/17/2004 14:53:04
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:03:12 +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 12:46:50PM +0300, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote:
> > But our userland is still far from being utf-8 friendly,
> > unfortunately. So for the time being I'd prefer a working "legacy"
> > 8-bit solution.
> I prefer the userland being fixed ASAP - and exposing bugs is the
> first step there.
Properly i18ned userland is surely a worthy goal, but a solution that
works now is also necessary. Hence I wrote:
| Or, rather, a solution that would allow for any conversion table to be
| supplied and let the kernel be agnostic about the actual charset -
| making users responisble for ensuring that the charsets match. Thus
| users can continue to use their legacy 8-bit encodings that are
| supported by exisitng userland. And developers will be able to work
| on utf-8 support. :)
Another factor is potential opposition to blank utf8-ication (vs real
i18n) from Japanese folks, who are, in my experience, very sensitive
to this distinction. I can only sympathize, having endured utf8'ed
LC_COLLATE on Linux.
Also, don't discount the sometimes frustratingly slow pace of
development in a volunteer project :). A solution that works now
*and* scales into the future is better then a solution that will work
some distant day.
email@example.com | Zu Grunde kommen
http://www.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/ | Ist zu Grunde gehen