charset confusion with speakup

[Thomas Stivers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I was just hoping for some name for the set used. I don't believe you
got some of them wrong, just that the set isn't exactly "standard"
(whatever that is) and I couldn't figure out why the :o digraph in vim
didn't get what I expected. If I come across any better list I will let
you know, but a lot of it has to do with the font used and so I suppose
even now there are a variety of ways to interpret 127-255. Perhaps when
utf8 is the *only* standard speakup should be updated, but until I know
more of the specs I am not going to be demanding any changes. Well
thanks for the response and now I will get back to my weekend ritual of
reading textbooks, manuals, and rants... er um mailing lists. *chuckle*

On 10/19/03 11:25 AM -0400, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> Hi Tom:  I'd like to say I used something very scientific when
> defining the character descriptions but that would be a lie.  I asked
> here on the list a few years back if anyone had a list of the
> character names for the extended ascii set.  Two people sent me lists
> Geoff Shang and Mike Gorse.  Those lists sat around for quite awhile
> before I got around to building them into speakup and truthfully I
> don't remember which list I used, maybe both.  So it is very possible
> that I actually got it wrong.  I think it is the extended pc character
> set as built into the computer.  If you find mistakes and there may be
> some let me know and we'll change them.  I hadn't noticed any wrong
> ones up until now but I can't say I've ever been diligent about
> testing them either.
> 
>   Kirk

- -- 
Unix is a user friendly operating system. It just picks its friends more
carefully than others.
Thomas Stivers	e-mail: stivers_t at tomass.dyndns.org	gpg: 45CBBABD
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/krAD5JK61UXLur0RAp6KAJ0UavDem0IKy48rv/9Oo3YO8rGoIACdFHXv
mc3cQRGvpLB4YXsXNEsf/1w=
=hIKs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----