Helge Hafting wrote:
> Wrong. Why in the world should they be "ascii" ???
Because that is required by the LyX internals. For example, the layout names
are run through the gettext mechanism, and that requires pure 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?
We have unicode for document contents. We don't have unciode for internal
keywords. This is the same as in LaTeX: You cannot define commands with
non-ascii characters.
This makes parsing easier, and in the case of LyX it will probably also help
when we go to xml. We could then use
<layout name="xyz">stuff<layout>
instead of
<layout>
<name>xyz</name>
<contents<stuff</contents>
</layout>
> 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?
You do not need to translate anything. The only requirement is that the
layout name is ascii, not english. If we add a new keyword GUIName you
could do something like
Style resyme
GUIName Resymé
End
and you have your norwegian name in the GUI while LyX can still use pure
ASCII for internal keywords. If a layout has a GUI name then that would be
used, otherwise the layout name would be translated with the usual
mechanism.
Georg
