On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 09:51:27AM +0100, Koblinger Egmont wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 12:52:23AM +0800, Abel Cheung wrote: > > > On 11/13/05, Koblinger Egmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > fancy, just the good old fixed-width fonts with 80 columns, but the > > > accented > > > (NFC) letters are okay. > > > > ... While all multibyte characters become junk. (since 2001) > > What do you mean by multibyte characters? Of course all the accented letters > are multibyte characters in UTF-8. I created several simple text files in > UTF-8 encoding, containing standard accented letters that are also part of > latin-1 or latin-2 (e.g. e with acute grave, e with acute accent, o with > double acute) as well as euro symbol, low-99 and high-99 quote marks etc., > sent them to the printer with "lpr filename" (with LANG=hu_HU.UTF-8 and no > other LC_* variables) and they all got printed correctly.
I tried printing a simple UTF-8 text file with greek text, and the result was quite inadequate. It managed to get the simple letters from the Symbol font (I assume), but the accented letters did not get printed out at all. The result is both ugly and unreadable for the most part. The OOo method, on the other hand, handled it fine. > What I didn't test is double-width (cjk) characters, combining symbols, > non-printable characters, invalid UTF-8 sequences and other similar more > tricky files. It's easily possible that OOo is better in this respect. -- Vasilis Vasaitis "A man is well or woe as he thinks himself so." -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
