Jethro Cramp wrote:
As I said in my first post, multi-lingual support in linux has for most of its history been very fragmented, poorly documented and functionally incomplete when compared to Windows systems. Is this good? No. But is this SuSE's responsibility? No.
New versions of MS Windows and MS Office use Unicode for everything and map other encodings or "code pages" to Unicode. Multi-lingual support on Linux might get a little easier if Linux distributions installed UTF-8 based (i.e. Unicode based) locales by default, - and if default installations of Linux included all the libraries and so on necessary for supporting non-Latin & complex scripts - and put them in the right places. SuSE, RedHat and so on *can* decide what they include on their CD's or DVD's and what gets included in a default installation. If emacs doesn't work with non-Latin scripts and xemacs does then perhaps only xemacs should be included in a default or minimal install - even if there might be howls of complaint from some quarters. - Chris