Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
Hi, At Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:32:17 +0100 (BST), (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It does not really matter that these are interpreted, by default, as > iso-latin-1. They could correspond to anything on your screen when you > are typing, and you can set up translation macros in troff to ma

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
Hi, At Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:14:44 +0200 (CEST), Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think *ideograms* have fixed width everywhere. > > Well, maybe. But sometimes there is kerning. Please consult Ken > Lunde's `CJKV Information Processing' for details. Exampl

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Ted Harding
On 21-Oct-00 Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote: > Hi, > > At Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:32:17 +0100 (BST), > (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> B: Troff should be able to cope with multi-lingual documents, where >> several different languages occur in the same document. I do NOT >> believe that the right

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Tomohiro KUBOTA
Hi, At Sat, 21 Oct 2000 15:39:24 +0100 (BST), (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Someone writing a document about Middle Eastern and related literatures > may wish to use the Arabic, Persian, Hebrew, Turkish (all of which have > different scripts), and also various Central Asian languages

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> Would it be useful to add to the texinfo documentation a note > explaining that `-a' should only be used for these situations? I've added some words, thanks. Werner

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> A.1. At present troff accepts 8-bit input, i.e. recognises 256 > distinct entities in the input stream (with a small number of > exceptions which are "illegal"). We need at least 20 bit (for Unicode BMP + surrogates) and the special characters. A 32bit wide number is thus the right choice IMHO

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> 1. Your 'charset' and 'encoding' are for troff or for preprocessor? In general. I want to define terms completely independent on any particular program. We have character set character encoding glyph set glyph encoding >I thought both of them are for preprocessor. The preproces

Re: [Groff] Re: groff: radical re-implementation

2000-10-21 Thread Ted Harding
Hi Werner (and all) Thanks for this clarifying explanation. I have a couple of comments, one explanatory, the other which, I think, may point to the core of the question. On 21-Oct-00 Werner LEMBERG wrote: >> Troff's multi-character naming convention means that anything you >> could possibly need