José Matos wrote:
On Wednesday 08 November 2006 10:39 am, Helge Hafting wrote:
Currently layout files can only contain ASCII, but changing that to utf8
would not be much work.
Then I hope for utf-8. .layout files. :-)
I understand what you want and I agree with the goal, but not with the way
to do it.
Layout names should be ascii and we should be able to have translations of
the layout names.
Wrong. Why in the world should they be "ascii" ???
They need to use a standardized encoding - so they work everywhere.
That is clear. But why an overly limited standard like ascii, now
that we _have_ unicode that also works all over the world?
utf-8 is the most convenient unicode standard for me. Now, if the
main developers goes for utf-16 or something different but
equally powerful - fine. I can convert. But don't impose silly
limits like ascii.
Or else we are repeating the mistakes made by excell when the spreadsheet
language was the same of the locale and it was not possible to exchange the
documents between different languages, because the commands were naturally
different. That is crazy...
You are mistaken here. This is my private document format.
I have no interest in developing an "english version". There simply
is no use for it. It is an internal document standard for the
university where I work - it is for documents written in norwegian.
Now, if you want to use my .layout anyway - fine. You can, no matter what
locale you run your lyx in it will work - you will get some
paragraph types with the norwegian names I selected. And if lyx
will uses some kind of unicode encoding for the .layout file, then
those names won't be _misspelled_ either.
So, none of that excel problem. It just isn't english - live with it
just as I live with lots of stuff that isn't norwegian. If you want
this .layout in english - feel free to have it translated.
Some .layouts are internationals and can be translated. These
are the generic ones like "book" and "article" and so on. And
english may perhaps be a requirement for .layouts to
be distributed with the lyx source.
But lyx is a generic document processors. People use it for
organization-internal documents. People make document
.layouts according to organizational or national standards.
Imagine a .layout for a governmental form, for example. There is
zero interest in translating such a .layout to foreign languages.
Why should anyone making a new .layout be forced to make
an english version with a translation? If they are making it
for a market using their own language?
Helge Hafting
