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