lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How can I avoid unicode and use Latin1? (Was: Wrong characters with


From: Han-Wen Nienhuys
Subject: Re: How can I avoid unicode and use Latin1? (Was: Wrong characters with jEdit)
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:44:25 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050720)

address@hidden wrote:
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005, Mats Bengtsson wrote:


What you have found in the source code files are some left-overs
from version 2.4 and earlier, where LilyPond only knew about Latin1.
If you browse through the mailing list archives, you can also find
out why this was not a satisfactory solution if you want to promote
the program outside western Europe.


(1) That's certainly one huge mass of "left-overs".  For a language
that allows coloured labelled noteheads, Gregorian notation, tenor
clef, and Lord knows what else, it is amazing that the developers
would choose to *remove* an existing capability.

(2) Deleting a capability is not "promotion".  Making unicode an available
*option* would be promotion, but deleting the existing ability to use
Latin-1 is not going to help you recruit users amongst the half billion
people in Western Europe and North America whose other software all
understands Latin-1.  (As a side remark, when I communicate with people in
Romania or other Eastern European locations, I have to use Latin-2;
software [mainly dictionaries] downloadable from those locations uses
Latin-2, *not* unicode.  Unicode may or may not become predominant
someday, but it certainly is not now.)


A. LilyPond actually _does_ support the Latin1 character set, as Latin1 and Unicode coincide on the first 256 codepoints.

B. LilyPond does not support Latin1 encoding. This is because

1. It's not possible to detect the encoding of a file. Supporting alternate encodings implies that users have to specify the encoding via the command line. This is error-prone, and leads to confusion for newbies.

2. If we do latin1, why should we not do latin2. And if we do latin1 and 2, why not Big5? EBCDIC? UTF-16? tibetan-iso-8bit? Where does it stop?

C. Unicode, not Latin1, is the future. Using UTF-8 gives us a much better chance of catching that half-billion in the future, as well as the 4.5 billion who don't use latin1 today.

--
 Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]