On Jan 24, 12:05 pm, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 24, 12:00 pm, Bryan <bryan.oak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Accessibility, like internationalization, is something few programmers > > spend much time thinking about. > > Thats another uninformed statement by you we can add to the mountains > of useless cruft you have offered so far. Unicode IS > internationalization and Guido thought it was SO important that > Python3000 auto converts all strings to Unicode strings. Obviously he > is moving us toward full Unicode only in the future (AS SHOULD ALL > IMPLEMENTATIONS!). We need one and only one obvious way to do it. And > Unicode is that way.
Ok, great. You've identified one programmer who thinks about internationalization. Not much of a compelling argument there. However, I think you missed my point. My point wasn't that people like Guido don't think of these topics. It's that the people in the trenches who use these tools don't think about these topics. How many of your co-workers actively think about internationalization and accessibility? I'm guessing none, but maybe you're lucking and work in a particularly enlightened team. I've perhaps worked closely with a few hundred programmers in my career, and very few of them thought of these subjects. In my experience it's just not something the programmer in the trenches thinks about. That is the point I was trying to make. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list