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

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

From: Terje Bless <link@tss.no>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 05:36:40 +0200
To: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010419053650-b01010701-51433cbf@192.168.1.6>
On 18.04.01 at 23:21, Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Terje Bless wrote:
>
>> 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`.

But it does have CP-*! validator.w3.org also has only glibc-2.1 (which we
found out the hard way after switching to Text::Iconv ;D) so we had to make
windows-* aliases for CP-* (just s/windows-(.+)/CP-$1/).
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2001 23:36:53 GMT

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