Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread walter harms
if libicons works while iconv() produces wrong results would it be the better way to use libiconv in general ? (until iconv() problems are fixed ?) just my 2 cents, walter Bruno Haible wrote: Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: The answer "patch glibc so that iconv transliterates the bullet to '

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Bruno Haible wrote: Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: The answer "patch glibc so that iconv transliterates the bullet to 'o'" is better (and in fact this is doable), but I think that users of non-Glibc systems (or old Glibc) will complain if this becomes the official answer. Why should the

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
walter harms wrote: if libiconv works while iconv() produces wrong results would it be the better way to use libiconv in general ? (until iconv() problems are fixed ?) No, for the following reasons: 1) because iconv() from libiconv, unlike iconv() from Glibc, totally ignores locale-specific

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
I wrote: Is this patch a right solution? Forgot to say: even if it is, it would be insane to require patched or not-yet-released version of glibc just for viewing manual pages "the right way" in locales such as pl_PL. A short-term distro-friendly solution is also needed. Any ideas? -- Ale

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > because of the unknown interaction between libiconv and glibc. I > tested libiconv by installing in into /opt/libiconv. I heard that users > screwed up their systems by installing libiconv into /usr, and thus I > won't do this myself. Clarification is needed from the

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > >Why should they complain? They can use GNU libiconv. It transliterates the > >bullet to 'o', like you wish. > > The "iconv" program from libiconv transliterates the bullet to ".", > which is also acceptable. libiconv converts the MIDDLE DOT to '.' and the BULLET and

Re: [Groff] comments

2006-01-26 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> For the first step, the support of all Unicode characters without > huge data tables, I intend to submit modifications to the following > files: Thanks! While I fully agree that groff's source code files should have much more comments, I'm not really happy with the layout you provide in your p

Re: [Groff] comments

2006-01-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Hello Werner, > While I fully agree that groff's source code files should have much > more comments, I'm not really happy with the layout you provide in > your patch. James Clark's code has a certain compactness which I > would like to retain Personal preferences about style obviously differ. Th

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Bruno Haible wrote: As for the "iconv" program from glibc, the situation is worse. I have prepared a patch against Glibc-2.3.6 (attached) that transliterates the offending characters produced by Groff into their ASCII equivalents if there is no any other suitable fallback. You can try it without

e-fax

2006-01-26 Thread Sheffield Marquis
super say hear can cancel forget Be send clean To spell need The sit go him break use In fall wait was think do true sing take me believe take active know play ___ Bug-groff mailing list Bug-groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gr

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > >The ACUTE ACCENT part looks wrong. > > But libiconv also transliterates it to "'" :) The correctness criteria for glibc are stronger than for libiconv, since it's used by many more people. It can also be a bug in libiconv, due to the fact that at the time when I in

Re: [Groff] Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> > 1. An acute accent is not a quoting character. Anyone using an > > acute accent for quoting is abusing this character. > > Agreed, Groff should be fixed. Also it probably should use Unicode > bullets (not middle dots) for bullets. I won't change the defaults. From the PROBLEMS file: *

[Groff] Re: Bullets in manual pages and -K groff option

2006-01-26 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> So: what is the official recommendation upon formatting manual pages > in non-ISO-8859-1 non-UTF-8 locales with the CVS version of Groff? You might provide small locale-specific macro files loaded in addition to -man which translate the problematic characters to something iconv can digest correc

Re: [Groff] comments

2006-01-26 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> > While I fully agree that groff's source code files should have > > much more comments, I'm not really happy with the layout you > > provide in your patch. James Clark's code has a certain > > compactness which I would like to retain > > Personal preferences about style obviously differ. Thank

Re: [Groff] unicode support - questions

2006-01-26 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> > classes > > = A :A 'A `A ... ; > > = U+3000 - U+303F; > > = U+3040 - U+309F; > > ... > > > > = ... ; > > > > properties > > width 24 > > ... > > kern V -3 > > I see. I had imagined the same thing with just the properties and > no classes, like the PO

Re: [Groff] unicode support - questions

2006-01-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Hello Werner, Thanks for all the answers. > > economic both in space in the font file format and in memory, rather > > than a representation that enumerates character after character. > > This is what I mean with `classes', something like this in a font > description file, using two new sections: