On 11/1/05, David Blue (Mailing List Addy) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >From the design point of view of a language, i18n should be an after thought > unless you have built in strings (and even in java they're a class) with the > exception of making sure your character types are able to hold Unicode bytes > instead of just ASCII. Also I can think of at least two good tool > kits/libraries for doing localization and internationalization of programs. > gettext which lots of gtk (straight C) based programs use, and qt's (C++) > built in internationalization stuff. So there *is* support, it's not not > necessarily wide spread because I'm not sure how windows handles it. But in > terms of i18n or being able to internationalize or localize a program that > should be up to the programmer on how to do it, not the language since > different programs have different needs. I agree. Windows 2k/3 and XP have better support for UTF-8 built into the operating system than their predecessors, but it almost requires a .NET compiler to take advantage of the UTF-8 capabilities of Windows (sorry guys, UTF-8 classes aren't Java-specific). GTK and QT both have ports to the Windows platform that can be used -- there are lots of options, but many people only have one language for their interfaces (and yes, I am guilty of this too). -- Chris Umphress <http://daga.dyndns.org/> _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
