vincent rioux wrote:
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