Hi, At Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:32:13 +0200 (CEST), Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> BTW, do you plan to release Groff with Japanese patch, with my >> preprocessor, as a makeshift until Groff with UTF-8 input will be >> available? (I thought so since you seem to be interested in my >> preprocessor working with Japanese-patched Groff. :-) > > Do you think this is useful? It introduces a lot of stuff which has > to be removed afterwards. Wouldn't it be better to stay with a > separate groff-jp distribution? Ok, I fully agree with you. Many users of Groff may be confused if Groff with Japanese patch becomes an 'official' version. >> The algorithm will be: check locale and use >> - -Tlatin1 for Latin-1 languages >> - -Tnippon for Japanese >> - -Tascii8 for other languages >> if groff wrapper is invoked with -Ttty. (IMO, we should not override >> user's specification of -Tlatin1, -Tascii, -Tnippon, and so on). > > What mechanism do you suggest for communication between the > preprocessor and troff? Well, I thought again and conclude that the current version of Groff cannot cooperate well with the preprocessor. If we want locale-sensibility before the re-implementation of troff, I suggest that groff wrapper is suitable for such an implementation. I think this is not so big evil. However, I think the best 'makeshift' will be that troff will support UTF-8 I/O without drastic change of internal of troff. I don't know this can be acheved with minor modification of troff or not, since I am not familiar with the internal of troff. Then the pre/postprocessors will be able to cooperate with troff. --- Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://surfchem0.riken.go.jp/~kubota
