On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 11:18:28PM +1300, Carey Evans wrote:
> "Jason M. Felice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What was the problem with not getting iconv() to work for us? Am I wrong on
> > any of my above points?
>
> At least with the glibc 2.1 iconv(), error handling is very poor. If
> it encounters a character it can't translate, it errors out without
> any way to recover.
Hmm, is that a design or implementation issue?
>
> There are also some advantages to the tables that recode generates.
> In the case of codepage 273 for German, codepoint 0xbc is an "overline"
> (Unicode 0x203e), which isn't part of ISO-8859-1. It looks the same
> as a "macron" (ISO-8859-1 character 0xaf) though, which is what recode
> uses.
The aforementioned libiconv claims to map characters to similar-looking
characters when it can't map them directly.
>
> There's also no way to use iconv() to convert to whatever the local
> multibyte encoding is, unless we know what it is in advance. We can
> probably assume UTF-8 if going for internationalisation, although who
> knows what wchar_t is?
Think think think think.... there should be no way to determine whether the
current console font is iso-8859-1 or some other, huh? Except for the
locale, if they have that set, maybe? Humm...
>
> I think the main obstacle to using iconv() was that nobody had it
> available to test last February when we were discussing it, so nothing
> got done.
>
> (BTW, I have a mostly complete archive of the linux5250 mailing list
> going back to 20 Nov 1998. Does anyone want to put it up on the web
> somewhere?)
>
-Jay 'Eraserhead' Felice
+---
| This is the LINUX5250 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To subscribe to this list send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+---
