On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 08:23, Josip Rodin wrote: > Ahm. You need it written in the Policy manual to use a 16-bit charset?
As Steve points out, the size of the code space isn't particularly relevant. > I don't see all those (7|8)-bit-charset-using people requiring the same... The problem is that we have no way to know what encoding an individual Debian Changelog entry is in. This is actually important for stuff like apt-listchanges. I constantly see broken characters in Debian changelogs in apt-listchanges from people using ISO-8859-1, when my terminal speaks UTF-8 natively. If you're using an ISO-8859-1 terminal, then apt-listchanges could recode the changelogs from UTF-8 to ISO-8859-1 (or try, anyways). And since my terminal speaks UTF-8, apt-listchanges could just pass it on asis. A situation where it can just be any encoding (or even a mix, if say a speaker of an ISO-8859-2 language later takes over from the previous ISO-8859-1 maintainer) is just terribly tbroken. UTF-8 is the one and only sane choice. This policy amendment got a number of seconds, so unless you can raise a coherent objection, I think it should go in.
