Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> The idea would be to register a new atom name
> UTF-8 used both as a selection target (requesting UTF-8 encoded text,
> for Unicode 2.0 or larger, with any control characters that the
> selection holder can provide), as well as a property type (containing
> text as above).
That's a good idea, I think.
One fairly obvious alternative is to continue using COMPOUND_TEXT, which
is based on ISO 2022. There is an escape sequence for UTF-8, so it
should be straightforward to extend compound text.
However, current clients do not support UTF-8 in compound text, so it
might be better to be able to negotiate. Hence, a new atom for UTF-8
selection would be a good idea.
> Any thoughts? Any information about /de facto/ standards?
If I remember correctly, there were some clients that used STRING for
the locale's encoding instead of restricting it to ISO 8859-1 as they
>  If you're interested, I'd be glad to share my empirical data by
> private e-mail (no slagging off of specific commercial software in
> public -- only generic ranting).
Yes, I'd be interested in that data.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:46 EDT