From: Ben Finney <ben+<python@be...> - 2009-08-18 14:05:56
> can we anticipate terminal coding ?
The man page document can't anticipate what terminal encoding the reader
will use, no. Since a man page is read in many different contexts and
terminals, I'm not sure what you're asking.
> we might have to check in/output-encoding and replace problematic
> characters ?
I was rather intending that we choose a set of character-to-roff
mappings that gives the desired results when we use any of the common
For example, the tests I showed demonstrated that ‘\(aq’ reliably gets
an apostrophe output from ‘groff’, but none of the other markup tried
\ “Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex… |
`\ It takes a touch of genius – and a lot of courage – to move in |
_o__) the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein |
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> grubert@... writes:
>> can we anticipate terminal coding ?
> The man page document can't anticipate what terminal encoding the reader
> will use, no. Since a man page is read in many different contexts and
> terminals, I'm not sure what you're asking.
i am asking if the manpage writer should check the output-encoding
specified by the user to rst2man and depending on this replace
some characters. therefore if someone wants to deliver utf manpages
he might do so, without getting all his apostrophes replaced by ``\(aq``s.
but i think i can wait for this one to come along.
p.s. i moved the manpage writer out of sandbox.