[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: console translator set without encoding
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: console translator set without encoding |
Date: |
Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:04:34 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i-nntp |
Danilo Segan, le dim 23 jan 2005 01:44:25 +0100, a dit :
> Using normalized forms would then simply be up to the writer and
> reader, just as it is up to the writer and reader today to check for
> all of "Music", "music", "mUSIC" and similar when a user actually
> searches for his music directory.
No !
Normalized form take care of glyphs that really can be coded several
different ways: for instance, latin e with acute accent may be directly
coded as 'é', but in unicode, may also be coded as 'e' followed by the
combining acute accent. These are really *two* ways to code *exactly*
the same thing (on the displaying point of view: an 'e' with an acute
accent above it). Hence normalization is needed to match both.
Regards,
Samuel
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/01/21
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2005/01/21
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/01/21
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2005/01/21
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/01/22
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2005/01/22
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Danilo Segan, 2005/01/22
- Re: console translator set without encoding,
Samuel Thibault <=
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Danilo Segan, 2005/01/23
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Marco Gerards, 2005/01/23
- Re: console translator set without encoding, Danilo Segan, 2005/01/23
Re: console translator set without encoding, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2005/01/22
Re: console translator set without encoding, Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek, 2005/01/23