Subject: Re: Patch: Fix for Bug 1164, 2nd try
From: Andrew Dunbar (hippietrail@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue May 22 2001 - 03:19:38 CDT
ha shao wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:47:09PM +0500, hvv@hippo.ru wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 May 2001, ha shao wrote:
> .....
> > > \kerning0\cf0\viewkind1\paperw12240\paperh15840\margl1440\margr1440\widowctl
> > > \sectd\sbknone\colsx360\headery0\footery0
> > > \pard{\f0 \'b3\'d4\'c1\'cb\'c2\'f0}}
> >
> > Is it correct RTF (seems so)?
> >
>
> Yes, it is correct.
>
> > Andrew's RTF looks different from yours because Andrew is running Win2k - it
> > seems XAP_EncodingManager.is_cjk_locale() returns 0 under Win2k and 1 (as
> > expected) under unix. Andrew, coduld you correct this (make is_cjk_locale()
> > returning proper value)?
I'll look at the Windows EncodingManager. I was working on this
and Windows IME + unicode input support before my trip and I don't
think it's up to date anymore...
> If the \uxxxx output is correct (that other wp can load it with no
> problem), maybe the is_cjk_locale is not needed? Sorry, I forget the
> reason to have that in the place. We must have some reason...
> Maybe for export to the 'rtf for old application' format?
Unicode aware RTF readers will be okay. Older ones will not.
In my opinion we should work as well as possible for new and
old readers so I will look into this.
Andrew Dunbar.
-- http://linguaphile.sourceforge.net _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat May 26 2001 - 03:51:06 CDT