apart from that, i think that there is a distinction between i18n (translating the software) and allowing non-ascii characters.
UTF-8 would be nice (if it worked!)
what do you mean exactly by "if it worked" ?
that UTF-8 gives problems everywhere. most terminal-based applications have no real support for utf-8; most editors do not like it either (try vi[m], try [x]emacs); even my beloved zope/plone has hard times so this would make editing pd-patches via a text-editor unusable (but of course this is a problem with the editors, not with pd)
i really love utf (far better than iso-8859 and the like), but outside OpenOffice it is still often unusable (at least on linux; i recon that w32 works fine with utf8 and osX might do as well)
mfg.asdr. IOhannes
ok, then i totally agree with you, the tricky part being /can unicode strings be integrated into a .pd (text file) relatively simply even if not directly editable with usual text editors? / after all, unicode characters can be represented by escape codes (ascii characters preceded by ), isnt' it?
by the way i would be interested to know how many people are editing their patchs without the patch/cord gui and for what reasons? for my part, i do it very seldom, only when i need to correct a patch that cannot be opened any more.
vincent