home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: uunet!relay.EU.net!ramz!ruediger (Ruediger Helsch)
-
- In article <579@longway.TIC.COM> std-unix@uunet.uu.net writes:
- >From: Donn Terry <uunet!hpfcrn.fc.hp.com!donn>
- >The problem is that reality impinges on the ideal world. In particular
- >there are LOTS of 646 terminals out there. And, as the European
- >participants note, they aren't going to get replaced with 8859 ones
- >for on the order of 10 years. (646 also is still a lowest common
- >denominator: as I understand it, sendmail can't handle 8-bit (if
- >I'm wrong, I apologize, but you get my point)).
-
- IMHO that's just not true any more. A great part of the common terminals in
- germany are of the VT220 style, and though they are not 8859 compatible,
- they are close enough for many purposes. 8859 and DEC multinational character
- set differ mainly in the special characters section. For german letters there
- is no difference between the two, same for most european letters. When we
- are looking for terminals, we don't consider those 7 bit oldies.
- For PCs under some Unix variants you can map characters on output to the
- screen. E. g. under Xenix we work with 8859 internally and map them to the
- IBM-PC character set on output. Works great!
-
- More difficult is input of national characters. Most german keyboards miss
- those braces and brackets that UNIX and C depend on, so we prefer using an
- american keyboard and need the ALT-key to input national letters. We would
- certainly prefer to buy keyboards with four additional keys if they existed.
-
- Most problems stem from uncooperative software: Ultrix shell and C shell are
- mot 8 bit clean, many communications programs mask the eighth bit, and standard
- TeX does't allow for input of eight bit characters (our patched version does).
- Hands up for System V, they are miles ahead of BSD in respect to 8 bit
- handling.
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 19, Number 58
-
-