W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2001

Re: Iconv vs. Unicode::* (was Re: several fixes)

From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 23:21:18 -0400 (EDT)
To: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
cc: <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0104182315590.1498-100000@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Terje Bless wrote:

> link@tux:~<1>link@tux:~<5>cat /etc/issue
> Red Hat Linux release 7.0 (Guinness)
> Kernel 2.2.17-14smp on an i686
> link@tux:~<2>rpm -q glibc
> glibc-2.2-12
> link@tux:~<3>iconv --list
> The following list contain all the coded character sets known.
[...]
> UK, UNICODE, UNICODEBIG, UNICODELITTLE, US-ASCII, US, UTF-7, UTF-8, UTF-16,
> UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, UTF8, VISCII, WCHAR_T, WIN-SAMI-2, WINBALTRIM,
> WINDOWS-1250, WINDOWS-1251, WINDOWS-1252, WINDOWS-1253, WINDOWS-1254,
> WINDOWS-1255, WINDOWS-1256, WINDOWS-1257, WINDOWS-1258, WS2, YU

That's certainly an impressive list, and it does seem easier than the
combination of Unicode::Map8, CJKVconv.pl, and jconv.c that I'm using.
The system-dependence puts me off a bit; htmlhelp.com only has glibc 2.1,
so it's missing the windows-* encodings in `iconv --list`.

-- 
Liam Quinn
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2001 23:20:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:56 GMT