À 10:50 2000-02-10 -0800, Brendan Murray/DUB/Lotus a écrit:
>I think most do. The only problems I've encountered are from MS, when the
>usual behavior is to accept the claim that the document is encoded as
>8859-1 and assume that it's 1252 if any C1 characters are encountered.
>Conversely, outbound data uses 8859-1, or 8859-15 if the Euro's present -
>I've never heard of anyone using the extra French and Finnish characters,
>but I suppose that would trigger it too.
[Alain] I have heard that many do use it directly for interchange, in
France mainly. I have contacts to that effect showing solutions under Unix
and Mac platforms. 8859-15 was done for the EURO and we profited of the
occasion to fix the historical mistakes done to French and Finnish in
ISO/IEC 8859-1.
In fact Latin 1 could have been replaced by this character set (8 useless
chaarcters were replaced) but that would not have been a better solution
than tagging 8859-1 when 1252 is used.
In fact also there would be no big harm if a 1252 font existed with both
the C1 space used for graphic characters and the 8 different characters in
the G1 space displayed as Latin 9 characters. It would not be perfect
(search problems), but it would be better off for display. But... oh
heretic am I, just discard that paragraph, I do not really mean it. These
are Satanic verses. (%=
[Brendan]
>While the purists object to the use of ANY charset which contains graphics
>in C1, I think it's perfectly acceptable, as long as the recipient has a
>fighting chance of interpreting it. What's supremely frustrating is the
>fact that the data claims it's 8859-1 when it's really 1252.
[Alain] Yes, I agree. And it is of course frustrating also to see the 1252
tag annoy our sighting when the native character set of the machine is
already 1252!!!
Alain LaBonté
Québec
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT