Re: [gtk-list] Re: GTK internationalization, right-to-left languages

[Tom Tromey <tromey cygnus com>]

Nimrod> Regarding Arabic - isn't it enough to assume one Unicode font
Nimrod> could cover all required chracters?

I'm not really sure what you're asking.

But the encoding of the text to be rendered and the encoding of the
font don't necessarily have to be the same.  Instead you'd use
something like the X font sets to map a unicode character onto the
appropriate character of the appropriate font (whose encoding might be
very different).

Does that answer your question?

>> To the Japanese eye, one of these character written in the Chinese
>> fashion, even though understandable, is incorrect. So to correctly
>> display a Unicode 6f22, it is not sufficient to just know if it is
>> Unicode 6f22, you also have to know whether it is the Japanese 6f22
>> or the Chinese 6f22.

Nimrod> Doesn't that somewhat defeat the point of Unicode? Oh, well.
Nimrod> Does it really matter, or can it be ignored?

It's a contentious issue.  I personally have been convinced by the
pro-Unicode arguments I've heard.  The basic argument is that language
is a characteristic of a higher level of encoding than characters.


I think this problem only really affects people manipulating
multi-lingual texts.  For any mono-lingual environment, you just pick
the font you like best.  If you're Japanese, this means you'll always
see the Japanese 6f22.

If you're dealing with multi-lingual texts you'll probably need
explicit support (i.e., markup indicating language) anyway.

HTH,
Tom