> it seems like you are avoiding the point on purpose.

No purpose I'm aware of :-)

> i don't think you can pick up a kernel with tweezers and make
> a bunch of abstract statements about it. and so i think the fact
> that unicode may be used anywhere a character is expected in plan9
> does have a lot to do with the system's functionality.


Unicode is mainly about being able to represent "human" written word. Its
availability is no use if the data being passed around will be just fine as
an octet stream. To my meager understanding, there's a classification of a
computer system's functions that puts "encoding text" along with
"representing text" and into the realm of "applications" and not "systems."
Hence my claim that UTF-8 adds not to "OS functions," while it may improve
"application functionality."

> what do you base this claim on? i'm pretty sure that the fonts
> distributed with the system are enough to support japanese, greek,
> and russian, to name only the ones i can think of quickly


I asked for clarification on the point and said that I may be mistaken.
Though, I'm still not sure I'll be able to successfully view a Russian web
page. Do you think that's feasible? What about Hebrew, Arabic, or Persian?

> there is not. perhaps this is something you could contribute.


Spare me. I'm no "hacker," I want to Get My Personal Job Done (tm). In
fact, that was my main point; lowlifes like me will use your system if it
can Get Their Job Done (tm) or they'll migrate to another system that can.
They won't bother coding.

--On Monday, June 30, 2008 6:56 PM -0400 erik quanstrom
wrote:

>> The fact the UTF-8 was first "implemented" on Plan 9 has nothing to do
>> with Plan 9's funtionality as an OS.

>
> it seems like you are avoiding the point on purpose.
>
> i don't think you can pick up a kernel with tweezers and make
> a bunch of abstract statements about it. and so i think the fact
> that unicode may be used anywhere a character is expected in plan9
> does have a lot to do with the system's functionality.
>
>> If the availability of UTF-8 is an advantage, the absence of a single
>> Unicode font in the system useful for non-Latin languages is a very
>> strong disadvantage.

>
> what do you base this claim on? i'm pretty sure that the fonts
> distributed with the system are enough to support japanese, greek,
> and russian, to name only the ones i can think of quickly
>
> and i am certain that code2000 and cyberbit which are available
> on sources provide some of the best unicode coverage for free fonts.
> they're not great fonts nor do they have total coverage, but no
> fonts do.
>
>> I even doubt there's a "simple" way of inputting, say, Hebrew
>> or Arabic in Plan 9. It'll be kind of you to clarify that point for me
>> if I'm mistaken.

>
> there is not. perhaps this is something you could contribute.
>
> - erik
>
>