Hi Bernd, > > If your terminal or output device only supports ISO-latin or is > > configured for ISO-latin or some other narrow character or non-UTF > > locale, shoving UTF-8 down its throat will not make you happy but > > result in gibberish. Actually, there is too much software already > > wrongly assuming that "everything can handle UTF-8". > > Everything without UTF-8 is old-fashioned.
Once various terminal emulators, SSH, and TTY-multiplexors like screen(1), give involved, UTF-8 can easily be unavailable due to configuration. > > To handle UTF-8 output, your terminal needs to be specifically > > configured for UTF-8. That may not be possible for all terminals > > and in all situations, and certainly many users don't do it. > > And? All modern PCs support Unicode. Yes, but users have non-modern personal set-ups because their ~/.profile has been with them for years and sets the locale to a non-ASCII single-byte one because back then it was the handy thing to do to send emails with their language's characaters. > > Regarding defaults, switching groff from ISO-latin by default to > > UTF-8 by default is certainly something that shouldn't be attempted > > in a casual commit without a discussion. I'm not sure you are > > driving into that direction, but your recent groffer commit might > > indicate that you might be - or it might not, i'm not sure. > > That default switch occurs only in the documentation. The documentation could suggest UTF-8 is preferred if the user has it available and can correctly configure their system to provide it, but it needs to make clear that it's not simply a case of saying -Tutf8 and all will be well. The current code has worked well for a long time. Cheers, Ralph.
