Path: utzoo!censor!geac!jtsv16!uunet!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU!mouse
From: mouse@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (der Mouse)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Xterm , 8 bit international fonts and font editor
Message-ID: <8911140606.AA06591@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Date: 14 Nov 89 06:06:35 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 29

> [xterm and 8-bit character sets]

>> The *real* way to support true Latin 1 would be to write a VT3xx
>> emulator (don't bother trying to extend xterm anymore).  VT3xx
>> terminals uses, among others, ISO 8859/1.

> This sounds like a good idea.  (But don't ask me to do it...)  But is
> it necessary to emulate a real terminal at all?

Not at all.  I wrote an xterm substitute which does things more the way
I want and it bears only philosophical resemblance to any real terminal
I've heard of.  Works just fine.  (Want it?  Send mail.)

Think about it for a minute.  What's the difference between emulating
an obscure but real terminal and "emulating" a nonexistent terminal?

The only advantage to (say) VT3xx emulation is that some software
already exists with knowledge of VT3xx characteristics.  But on modern
systems with terminfo, termcap, or whatever the analog is on your
favorite system, the exact sequences are irrelevant.

For that matter, xterm does only partial VT100 emulation.  To pick a
mismatch that has caused me a little trouble recently, you can't resize
a VT100.

					der Mouse

			old: mcgill-vision!mouse
			new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu