Rösberg, Thu 21.11.02
Hi Arkady,
On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 02:37:51 +0300 (MSK), Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
RQ ( my wish: below 4000
RQ my second wish: below 8000
RQ my last wish: below 16000 :-((()
AF I agree completely!
AF Let me express it more precisely: it would be handy to have all
AF codepage number below 4098.
AB As stated by Matthias, DR-DOS assigns for code pages with euro sign
AB some very big values.
I think I heard about this, too. But is there an official DR-DOS
release with such codepages?
AF Codepage numbers above 16383 would be nightmare!
AB Why?
Well, with the assumption that all codepage IDs would not take more
than 10 bits, there would be 6 remaining bits to denote variations of
the existing codepages. If I remember correct, the DR-DOS method
denotes codepage 858 as 20850. For automatted processing it is much
easier to subtract 2 than looking up in an additional lookup table
for variants of codepages.
With 'regular' codepage IDs above 16383, there would only one bit
remain for variations - this could become painful for system
programmers.
AF lot of codepages without any official IDs. The most important of them
AF is KOI8-R, which should be supported as well. (Arkady, do you agree?)
AB No.
What a pity.
AB See the difference: under Windows you have one system codepage (to be
AB precise: two with so called OEM) and may use any fonts simultaneously.
AB This is how was added support for KOI8-R in Netscape Navigator before it
AB begins a _real_ internationalized program.
Well, as it goes for me, I would likely have support for ISO-Latin-1
under DOS, this would spare me much conversion work for my emails.
I thought you would feel similar.
AB Under DOS you have one system codepage and you _can't_ have other
AB simultaneous fonts [for different code pages]. This is nature of text modes,
AB only some _applications_ may support in graphics mode some different fonts.
I don't understand this. Can't you use CHCP to switch between
codepages?
AB On the other side, KOI8-R never used in DOS as base codepage, although
This is no reason against. You know, there was a time where Internet
was never used before. Nowadays many people use it in spite. ;-)
AB beside ALT (CP866) codepage there was three other - MAIN, BULGAR and GOST.
AB KOI8-R used only as commincation base, so under DOS you should only have
AB translation tables in communication programs.
Well, I don't know whether these codepages contain important
characters which are not contained in KOI8-R.
AB Conclusion: under DOS may/should used only CP866. Adding support for
AB other codepages (even for Windows CP1251) have no sense - at least, because
AB they not contain pseudographic characters.
Well, I confess: you have more knowledge about this topic as I have.
AB BTW, to complicate case the more, there is another KOI8 - KOI8-U
AB (Ukrainian KOI8). You may see the differences with KOI8-R in RFC2319.
I will take a look at it by chance. Thanks.
Regards,
Axel.
--
list options/archives/etc.: http://www.topica.com/lists/fd-dev
unsubscribe: send blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@mail-archive.com
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Rv5.bbRv4l.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===
