Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Cygwin Termcap information involving extended ascii charicters References: <002901c09fd2$400bfd50$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru> <3A9A7115.569F6BF1@ece.gatech.edu> <10024048630.20010226190102@logos-m.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Kazuhiro Fujieda Date: 06 Mar 2001 17:20:31 +0900 In-Reply-To: Egor Duda's message of Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:01:02 +0300 Message-ID: Lines: 30 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 >>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 19:01:02 +0300 >>> Egor Duda said: > As for "international friendliness", i personally think that > cyrillic oem codepage 866 is far more "friendly" then cyrillic > codepage 1251 used as ansi codepage on consoles in russian windows. ANSI codepages don't necessarily have "international friendliness". In many languages, they are compatible with the international standards of character sets than OEM codepages. It means they are compatible with the character sets adopted in i18n frameworks of UNIX environments. For example... Dutch, French, German, Italian...: CP1251 is upper compatible with ISO8859-1. Turkish: CP1251 is upper compatible with ISO8859-9. Hebrew: CP1255 is upper compatible with ISO8859-8. Greek: CP1253 is almost upper compatible with ISO8859-7. All OEM codepages except for double byte character sets don't have such compatibility at all. ____ | AIST Kazuhiro Fujieda | HOKURIKU School of Information Science o_/ 1990 Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple