Subject: Re: [I18n] project fork?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Noriyuki Soda <email@example.com>
Date: 12/21/2000 04:40:20
> 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
> 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
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:
... this function returns corresponding UTF-8 locale to
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);
... create Unicode FontSet here ...
In other words, what you had to do in this area was to add ONLY ONE API,
rather than bunch of new Xutf8 APIs.
> > And as I already said, the Xutf8 API doesn't solve the problem.
> > The only option to solve this problem is to make (very few) APIs
> > which have explicit locale argument.
> That is an option, certainly.
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?
> > In other words, Xutf8 APIs don't solve real problem, don't add
> > any new feature, only add incompatiblity and make code bloat.
> Bruno, how big is it, a couple of kilobytes or something? That's little
> enough that it might not actually increase the memory footprint.
As I already said, current implementation of Xutf8 APIs isn't good
enough. It should become as big as IIIMXCF implementation.