=?UTF-8?Q?Re:_Quotation_marks:_Using_=E2=80=9C=E2=80=9D_instead_of_""?=
- From: "Alexander Jones" <alex weej com>
- To: desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Quotation marks: Using “” instead of ""
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:32:06 +0100
Hi list
To reignite this discussion now that I've finished my exams...
I posted this on Simos' blog a while back, but the discussion there
had died off it seems, so I'll repost here.
UTF-8 is designed so that subsequences are unambiguous. You won't get
a byte less than 0x80 in any part of a multi-byte sequence. bytes
0x00-0x7F map directly to 7-bit ASCII.
Some people are worried about string functions breaking. I really
don't see how this is the case, seeing as we're doing g_some_function
(_("Some ASCII string")) which is replaced with a UTF-8 string at
runtime anyway.
Does anyone have any actual proof of UTF-8 in our translatable strings
breaking C?
Somebody said that any byte with a the MSB set (i.e. 0x80-0xFF) will
cause some compilers to break. Is this true? Can they be fixed? And if
not, do we have to support them?
If we can come to an agreement, I will write a Live page giving
guidelines on how to use directional quotation marks, for those who
may be unfamiliar with typing them, etc.
Alex
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]