On Mon, 29 Dec 2008, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > Matthias Clasen wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Allin Cottrell <cottr...@wfu.edu> wrote: > > > >> I judged it a devel issue because it raised a question about > >> whether glib was doing the right thing in not converting U+2212 to > >> "the nearest" character in ISO-8859-1, 0x2D. However, I accept an > >> offlist response from Dom Lachowicz, namely that these are > >> different characters and so glib is right not to convert. > > > > This is really a question about iconv behaviour, since glib doesn't do > > its own conversion. And I guess when you as the iconv developers about > > this, they > > will tell you that iconv is not about guessing the 'nearest' > > character, but rather > > about recoding characters from one coded character set to another. A > > hyphen is not the same character as a minus, thus iconv won't recode > > the latter to the former, even if they look similar on paper. I agree > > that it would be more useful > > if iconv _would_ do what you expected it to do... > > The glibc implementation of iconv actually does that if you nicely ask it to: > > $ echo − | iconv -f utf8 -t latin1 > iconv: illegal input sequence at position 0 > $ echo − | iconv -f utf8 -t latin1//translit > - > > Should glib try the //translit version first? I think so. That's what I made > vte do, and filed this bug about it: > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=502951
Sounds like a good idea. But I notice there has been no progress on that bug since over a year ago. Might it do better as a feature request, if there is such a thing? (Simply on the grounds that calling for the default behavior of iconv is unlikely to be considered a bug, even if one could do better with a different call.) Allin Cottrell _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list