Subject: Re: [I18n] Xutf* and friends
To: Noriyuki Soda <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Robert Brady <email@example.com>
Date: 12/20/2000 19:50:53
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Noriyuki Soda wrote:
> > And there is another issue, that en_US.UTF-8 may have a different fontset
> > than zh_CN.UTF-8 and ja_JP.UTF-8 - if we just do
> > setlocale(en_US_UTF8_locale),
> > you effectively break locales which need a different fontset than
> > en_US. (I suppose I have no need to tell you about the CJK font style
> > variations)
> If you took this issue seriously, you must noticed that what you
> had to do in this area is not to add the Xutf* APIs, but adding
> the following API:
I do take this issue seriously. And this had not occured to me.
> char *XFree86UTF8Locale(locale_name);
> ... this function returns corresponding UTF-8 locale to
> argument locale.
> e.g. XFree86UTF8Locale("ja_JP.eucJP") returns "ja_JP.UTF-8".
> Then you can become to write the following code fragment:
> current_locale = setlocale(LC_CTYPE, NULL);
> setlocale(LC_CTYPE, XFree86UnicodeLocale(current_locale));
> ... create Unicode FontSet here ...
> setlocale(LC_CTYPE, current_locale);
> In other words, what you had to do in this area was to add ONLY ONE API,
> rather than bunch of new Xutf8 APIs.
I'm glad to see a slightly more sensible suggestion. However, this still
doesn't solve the problems of
* UTF-8 input
* UTF-8 string <-> COMPOUND_TEXT string conversion
* thread safety
* requiring UTF-8 locales to be installed
And I'm sorry, but lack of ickiness counts for a lot.
> And Xutf8* APIs don't solve this problem.
> > Have you got a patch to do that?
> Patch to X11 part is quite trivial, isn't it?
So in other words, you should be able to do it quite quickly. I look
forward to seeing your patch.
Myself, I don't think its very high priority, so I won't be writing it,
but I won't object to it.
> As I already said, current implementation of Xutf8 APIs isn't good
> enough. It should become as big as IIIMXCF implementation.