You misunderstand deadkeys: they reverse the order of typed combining marks. Let
me spell it out.
User types <combining-ring-above>. Host echos nothing
User types <a>. Host stores <a-ring> and echos the appearance of <a-ring>.
The host could also use form D, and store the sequence <a><combining-ring-above>,
and also echo something with the right appearance (utilizing overlays). This is
what would have to be done for complex scripts, or things like
<g><combining-ring-above>, if they are supported by the host.
Mark
Robert Brady wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, Murray Sargent wrote:
>
> > (The following may well have been mentioned earlier; I haven't followed the
> > whole thread). If you enter combining mark sequences using deadkeys, there
> > shouldn't be a problem. With deadkeys, nothing is displayed on the terminal
> > until the base character is typed and nothing is sent to the pattern-match
> > code. When the base character is typed, the corresponding fully composed or
> > partially composed character sequence is sent to the terminal and to the
> > pattern-match code. Deadkey input methods are usually part of the
> > underlying OS, but apps can also implement them fairly easily.
>
> That doesn't work. Consider a telnet connection. At the end of one TCP
> packet, the <a> is placed, but the <combining-ring-above> will not fit, so
> it has to go in the next packet.
>
> Maybe the second packet is delayed for a few seconds, due to network
> problems (why is not relevant).
>
> The app gets the <a> and then a few seconds later gets the
> <combining-ring-above>.
>
> If you can see a way round this (other than abandoning the terminal
> metaphor), the linux/utf-8 project would no doubt be happy to hear it. :)
>
> --
> Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:53 EDT