Regexps, for one. Font-handling, for another; OOo and Firefox do a
crummy job with mixed Han texts. I don't know how we're going to
emulate Mule in that respect with Unicode as the primary internal
I have some ideas, but they have to wait for me to finish the basics!
However, you mention OOo and Firefox - does anything (apart from
Emacs!) do better? It would be nice to have an example of material
that Firefox deals with badly, but something else deals with well.
> Urgh. Typesetting is a hard task.
I know that. I just don't think we should rule out improvements in
XEmacs's capabilities there.
Feel free to do the work;-) I can't imagine why one would want to use
Emacs to do typesetting - but then I can't imagine why one would use
OOo/Word either, and millions do. (But few of those millions are
typical Emacs users...)
For what it's worth, I would have no trouble reading Japanese
such as 将来 (future) or 将軍 (shogun == generalissimo) if written
with the reference glyph (in the context of other simplified Han).
And are you doing that by "error correction", i.e. seeing a wrong
shape, but matching it to a nearby word that you know, or do you read
as one might read Gothic (Fraktur) script, recognizing that it's the
right letters, but in a style one doesn't know well?
XEmacs-Beta mailing list