[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022
From: |
James Cloos |
Subject: |
Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022 |
Date: |
Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:55:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>>>> "DDLHG" == David De La Harpe Golden <address@hidden> writes:
DDLHG> But actually I think emacs should be using using coding system
DDLHG> compound-text-with-extensions by default, not coding system
DDLHG> compound-text? At least if you haven't customized
DDLHG> selection-coding-system.
Perhaps for selections, but I was looking into wierd results for the
WM_NAME and WM_ICON_NAME properties. (My patch to also set the _NET
version in the non-GTK case --- just like GTK already does --- fixes
that for window managers which support the _NET properties, but mine
does not, yet.) For that, the c code explicitly uses compound-text,
not compound-text-with-extensions.
That difference may explain why I was unable to duplicate the issue
with selections.
So perahps the fix is to use the -wiht-extensions variation in
x_set_name_internal()?
-JimC
--
James Cloos <address@hidden> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
- X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, James Cloos, 2010/07/06
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, David De La Harpe Golden, 2010/07/06
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, James Cloos, 2010/07/06
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/07/06
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, James Cloos, 2010/07/07
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, James Cloos, 2010/07/07
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, David De La Harpe Golden, 2010/07/07
- Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, James Cloos, 2010/07/14
Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, David De La Harpe Golden, 2010/07/06
Re: X11 Compound Text vs ISO 2022, Kenichi Handa, 2010/07/29