Defaults

[edscott wilson garcia]

El mi? 23-07-2003 a las 07:10, Koblinger Egmont escribió:
> Hi,
> 
> On 23 Jul 2003, Joe Klemmer wrote:
> 
> > > There's an icon for gvim, the arrow next to it brings other editors.
> > > There's an icon for mozilla, the arrow next to it brings other network
> > > software.
> > > There's a paint icon for gimp, the arrow next to it offers xmms and
> > > mplayer. It isn't too logical.
> >
> > 	This is just a default setting and has nothing to do with what ends up
> > in the menus.  Mine don't look anything like the default.
> 
> I wasn't talking about menus (I didn't even mention this word), as the
> Subject: shows I'm talking about the defaults. Of course I can customize
> everything, I just wanted to point out an inconsistency in the default.
> 
> 
> > 	Dillo rocks!  It's the best and fastest browser for reading
> > documentation or dealing with simple web sites like those made by
> 
> 
> I see a lot of people here like dillo.
> 
> No doubt: it's far one of the fastest browsers, which is really nice. I do
> accept if iso8859-1-speaking people say it's their favourite one. My
> mother tounge is 8859-2. Accents are displayed incorrectly, since dillo
> doesn't choose a -2 charset even if the document tells it to do. If
> someone wants to, I can send a screenshot of an utf-8 encoded page, but I
> guess you can imagine the results: it is shown as 8859-1, making it
> completely unreadable, while it's perfect in nearly all other browsers.
> 
> If we were around 1997, I'd say dillo is the best browser available. But
> the world has changed a lot since then, and internationalization has
> become a very important issue, IMHO much more important than startup time.
> The world is moving towards i18n, UTF-8, and XFce is moving this way too.
> IMHO if XFce wants to be a good desktop environment with good default
> setting for everyone, not just those who speak 8859-1, then it shouldn't
> by default offer an application which mishandles all non-8859-1 charsets.
> 
> I know it is very hard to accept this argument for everyone who uses
> 8859-1 and has never seen any troubles with accents. I've seen a lot. Not
> in mozilla, galeon, epiphany, konqueror, opera, links -g, but in a lots of
> other appliactions, including dillo.
> 
> How does the gtk1 vs. gtk2 question arise? I really don't care if an
> application is gtk1 or gtk2 as long as is does the correct thing (even
> though I prefer AA fonts of gtk2). gtk1 doesn't provide any functions for
> correct multilanguage support, hence one can hardly see gtk1 apps that
> handle character sets correctly. (There are exceptions, e.g. firebird 0.6
> or sylpheed 0.9 are said to show correct characters, I haven't tested
> them), but this needs a huge amont of extra work from the programmers.
> However, gtk2+pango offers you correct displaying of any characters
> without bothering with them, so gtk2 application do everything correctly
> without taking care of them and coding many days for it. That's why in
> general gtk1 applications suck while gtk2 do it the right way. There are
> rare exceptions on both sides, and I really wouldn't talk against dillo if
> it was an exception amongst the gtk1 apps which handled accents correctly.
> 

You are answering the gtk1 vs gtk2. By using gtk2, all text output has
to be utf-8, so that iso codesets are converted to utf-8 before output
to the gtkTextView. As a result, all the accents are readable.

regards,

Edscott

> 
> 
> bye,
> 
> Egmont
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xfce4-dev mailing list
> Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
> http://moongroup.com/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
>