Re: Question about RTF export

Dom Lachowicz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We've gotten a few RTF export bugs recently, related
> CJK encodings. Part of the mess is due to the
> broken-ass EncodingManager class and trying to emit
> text in CP1252 and BIG5 encodings as "appropriate".
>
> I'm wondering if there's any good reason why we don't
> *always* export RTF using codepage 65001 (UTF-8) or a
> UCS2/UTF-16 codepage and just be done with it, rather
> than mucking around with "NativeWindows Encodings".
>
> Feedback from Hub, Martin, and TF is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Dom
>

I think the only reason is to allow readers that are not Unicode
compliat to read the output -- I personally think that might have been a
good reason a couple of years back but no longer. I would be quite happy
to use Unicode only. I did not realise rtf can cope with utf-8, and my
vote would be to use it rather than ucs-2 or utf-16.

Tomas
Received on Sun Feb 27 19:32:32 2005