Re: [dev] (x)HTML-based office suite? (aka suckless word processing solution-2)

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:13:41AM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Antoni Grzymala <antoni_AT_chopin.edu.pl> wrote:
>> Are you proposing that nationals of a single non-English nationality
>> (which was the topic of the main thread among other things) should
>> communicate between themselves in English because there's the God-send
>> called ASCII and Uriel says so?
>
>No, Uriel likes UTF-8 for English. That way your charset can support
>all of the localized alphabets you won't be using.

It can, all with no added bloat so long as you stay within the
7-bit ASCII range. Then you also get all of the latin and
germanic diacritics which turn out to be useful in a lot of odd
circumstances that come up when you don't expect. You also get
all kinds of math and scientific symbols which are useful to a
lot of people, and which is very painful to those people when
they need to communicate in some eccentric, scientific character
encoding. And people can post their names, or key words, in
their home tongues (or alphabets, or ideographs) without having
to worry that the recipient has their specific national
encoding. Plus, when you agree on a universal encoding, you
don't have to worry about which encoding a file you've received
is in. Whether it's 8859-1, 8859-4, windows-1250, Shift-JIS,
UCS-2, UCS-4, or whatever.

-- 
Kris Maglione
When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when
it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it
so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil
power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.
	--Benjamin Franklin