confusing labels
Xavier Legoff
xlegoff at gmail.com
Mon Apr 13 05:29:26 CEST 2009
Dear Mr. Klensin,
Another input I find interesting from Don Osborn, calling for
organised versatility in headers and algorithms and to foresee
transition and parallel solutions.
Sincerely.
Xavier Legoff
---
A quick review of coding on BBC World Service pages in diverse
languages at http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/languages/ reveals … a
diversity of charset codes used, with most pages *not* in utf-8. I
suspect that BBC is anticipating the kinds of systems that users in
each language population will rely on, trying to accommodate the least
sophisticated systems and font repertoires. Assuming that their read
is accurate (and that they're not just being just conservative about
making the change to utf-8), this would seem to be an interesting
window on how widespread the use of Unicode is or is not at the
present time. On the other hand, it is worth noting that no
Latin-based orthography is displayed on bbc.co.uk in utf-8, even when
characters beyond Latin-1 are used (Turkish) or should be used
(Hausa). If one had the time, it would be interesting to look also at
other international radio sites - VOA, RFI, Deutsche Welle, Radio
China, etc.
Among the questions I have are whether we can expect that all web
content (at least on high profile international sites) will eventually
go to utf-8 or another Unicode rendering or will various non-Unicode
8-bit standards continue to hold sway in selected areas for some time
to come? I think that in the "ecology" of localization in a region
such as West Africa, the use or non-use of utf-8 by international
websites for a language like Hausa (which basically is the difference
between being able to use the formal orthography or resorting to an
ASCIIfied transcription as they currently do) certainly has an effect
on the way that that language and others are used in text offline. At
what point does the argument that too many local systems in a region
do not have unicode fonts lose its validity, and at what point should
organizations like BBC take the leadership in use of utf-8 (as it did
a while back with a Unicode font for Urdu)?
BBC lists 32 languages, but two of them - Kinyarwanda and Kirundi -
lead to the same "Great Lakes" page (the two languages are
interintelligible). Also for the sake of this list, I count
Portuguese only once, even though BBC has Brazilian and African
varieties separate. Hence the total below comes to 30.
Albanian charset=windows-1250
Arabic charset=windows-1256
Azeri charset=utf-8
Bangla charset=utf-8
Burmese charset=utf-8
Chinese charset=gb2312
English (Caribbean) charset=iso-8859-1
French charset=iso-8859-1
Hausa charset=iso-8859-1
Hindi charset=utf-8
Indonesian charset=iso-8859-1
Kinyarwanda (& Kirundi) charset=iso-8859-1
Kyrgyz charset=utf-8
Macedonian charset=windows-1251
Nepali charset=utf-8
Pashto charset=utf-8
Persian charset=utf-8
Portuguese (both Brazilian and African) charset=iso-8859-1
Russian charset=windows-1251
Serbian charset=windows-1250
Sinhala charset=utf-8
Somali charset=iso-8859-1
Spanish charset=iso-8859-1
Swahili charset=iso-8859-1
Tamil charset=utf-8
Turkish charset=charset=windows-1254
Ukranian charset=windows-1251
Urdu charset=utf-8
Uzbek charset=utf-8
Vietnamese charset=utf-8
Totals:
13 utf-8
9 iso-8859-1
3 windows-1251
2 windows-1250
1 windows-1254
1 windows-1256
1 gb2312
More information about the Idna-update
mailing list