On 20-05-14 21:20, Milan Zamazal wrote: >>>>>> "PG" == Paul Gevers <elb...@debian.org> writes: > > PG> On 20-05-14 17:01, Milan Zamazal wrote: > >> In theory, it's possible to implement the support for a given > >> language in UTF-8 (some Indian languages do that), but it's > >> cumbersome as all the UTF handling must be done manually, without > >> any support from Festival. > > PG> I don't understand your remark. Why would UTF-8 to ISO-8859-X be > PG> any more easy than ISO-8859-X to UTF-8? > > The text processing part of a language support in Festival processes > text input. The easiest way to implement the processing is to use 8-bit > (single byte) input coding. Using multibyte characters within Festival > is like using them in old C without wchar etc., i.e. something nobody > does unless really needed. So in order to use UTF-8 input directly > instead of some 8-bit coding, one would probably implement something > like UTF-8 -> 8-bit coding conversion in the Festival language pack, > which makes little sense when better and working conversion tools (such > as iconv) are already available.
I fully understand the latter rationale, but I thought you meant (by "some Indian languages do that") that it was already possible. What are they than doing if not "fixing" festival itself? Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
