flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > MenuetOS > Proposal: Languages and Internationalization

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
Hi all,

Considering:
- We need to avoid a scattered distributions of Meos differing only on interface language.
- Some world languages do need Unicode.
- We want to easily incorporate enhancements among the code, no matter the origin.
- We are asm programmers in an asm OS, so we don't need zero-terminated strings.
- It is nice to have the ability to switch between interface languages at runtime or to hot-plug another language in any moment.
- We need to easily provide regional variants for the world languages.
- To port MeOS to other languages, you just need to translate one file Smile and with the help of a translator/wordprocessor.
- We need a coherent and useable system locale for internationalization managed and coordinated by menuetos.org.
- This will compact even more the OS and will give a coherent look and feel.

Given this, please feel free to comment or improve the following proposal:
To have a system-wide and centralized-managed collector of strings and localization info.
Each program to be completely transparent regarding interface localization.
Strings in table could be reagrupped for similarity or on other criteria.
System will manage string tables and all applications obtain access through a system call. (In the example provided, I considered an unexisting call: 19)


Description: Studies for system wide locale management
Download
Filename: Meos_locale.zip
Filesize: 6.51 KB
Downloaded: 317 Time(s)

Post 07 Jun 2004, 15:40
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Haven't look at the code - but be sure to sort the sting keys (whether they are strings themselves, or DWORDs, or another thing), so you can use a binary search while looking up strings...
Post 07 Jun 2004, 16:18
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
neonz



Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 62
Location: Latvia
neonz
pelaillo wrote:
- Some world languages do need Unicode.


Really? AFAIK all world languages have at least one 8-bit codepage (and I think all they have at least two by M$ - OEM (DOS) and ANSI (Windows)).

pelaillo wrote:
- We are asm programmers in an asm OS, so we don't need zero-terminated strings.


Hmm... I like to use ASCIIZ strings in asm.
Post 07 Jun 2004, 21:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
neonz wrote:
Really? AFAIK all world languages have at least one 8-bit codepage (and I think all they have at least two by M$ - OEM (DOS) and ANSI (Windows)).


Such affirmation is not very polite, neonz. It simply shows that you don't know all world languages Sad
Why do you think Unicode exists for?

Quote:
Hmm... I like to use ASCIIZ strings in asm.


Don't worry, you can continue to do it without problem. The proposal is not mutex. To handle constant strings with ASCIIZ is only a little unnecessary overhead.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 01:10
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
neonz



Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 62
Location: Latvia
neonz
pelaillo wrote:
Why do you think Unicode exists for?


AFAIK Unicode exists to get out of need to switch codepages (as it have all characters included). Believe or not, but there exists hundreths of 8-bit codepages around. And if there exists some language that does not have 8-bit codepage for it, it's possible that it isn't in Unicode too (because if such language users would need to use it in computers, they have been created 8-bit codepage by themselves).
Post 08 Jun 2004, 01:40
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
So, you'd rather like an 8-bit representation with different codepages, that means a filename or string looks different in different countries? And you believe that all languages can do with 8-bit codepages?

I wonder why MicroSoft went to the trouble of making NT 100% unicode natively, and use unicode filenames in NTFS Rolling Eyes
Post 08 Jun 2004, 02:59
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
SamuelGaliza



Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 11
SamuelGaliza
If you use UNICODE UTF-8 you can use al character set of UNICODE but it's compatible with ASCII and then most MenuetOS programs don't need to rewrite if you use english. I think that is the best solution, think in BeOS and most new Requests For Comments (RFCs) like xml specifications that suport UTF-8.
Good look. Smile
Post 08 Jun 2004, 07:37
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
SamuelGaliza,
I think we can do it well with UTF-8, I'm going to try it.

I have only one doubt: I wonder, as f0dder says, why WinNT, but also KDE and Gnome go fully Unicode?

Note for neonz:
A mean alphabetized person in China would recognize arround 5.000 different symbols. A well educated chinese would recognize between 30.000 and 60.000 different symbols. A chinese linguist even more than double than that.

That means a total of 234 codepages.

http://www.unicode.org/

Quote:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/unicode.html
Unicode is well on the way to replace ASCII, ISO 8859 and EUC at all levels. It allows you to handle not only text in practically any script and language used on this planet, it also provides you with a comprehensive set of mathematical and technical symbols to simplify scientific information exchange.


Last edited by pelaillo on 08 Jun 2004, 13:04; edited 1 time in total
Post 08 Jun 2004, 13:01
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
mhack



Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
mhack
I think we don't need to add more stuff to MenuetOS,
if somebody wants their own language version they can have it,
as soon as you start adding UNIVERSAL stuff to MenuetOS that is rarely used by 90% of users you are on a fast track to a Windows..

I would say keep it simple.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 13:02
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
mhack wrote:
I would say keep it simple.


You haven't downloaded it yet, I suppose?

I'm talking about simplification.

Look at the mess with the few different distributions with different features colliding to each other.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 13:07
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
mhack



Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
mhack
I'm using .77 3.0d
I just left the kernel compiled..

I wanted just to warn you guys, simplification - I'm all for it! Smile
Post 08 Jun 2004, 14:04
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
mhack,
If you want to do a sincere warn, please have the courtesy to give a detailed look at the matter, to avoid any preconcepts.

And if after you have given a detailed look you still think there is any overcomplication, please point it up in order to fix it.

The same is valid for all people posting in threads without taking the time to look at what the subject is related. This leads in many unnecessary rework and friends discouraged.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 18:04
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
mhack



Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
mhack
pelaillo,

I guess you right, please accept my apologies!

mhack
Post 08 Jun 2004, 18:59
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
You are welcome. Smile
Post 08 Jun 2004, 19:06
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
bloglite



Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 109
Location: East Tennessee U.S.A.
bloglite
The "Mess" of course is our playground.

If there were just ONE way then we would only have ONE flavor.

I like pistachio but not only pistachio.

The best WILL rise to the top.

Just a matter of time and co-operation.

Whining is pretty much a waste of time.

The CODE speaks for itself. No crowing or whining needed.

Let the various releases speak for themselves.

Pick it apart put it together your way.

Is this not supposed to be a learning experience?

Later.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 19:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
Please look at the comment above: "...differing only on interface language"
I do appreciate the different implementations out there and I agree about the fact that only the CODE says the last word.

It is sad that none do talk about the very small CODE I provide here to show my approach, because otherwise you will see a different aspect.

To resume in a little paragraph:
Instead of having all constant strings scattered all inside the programs, we could have a uniform resource collector to be able to save space, maintain easy the translations and switch between languages hotplugging it at runtime if we prefer.
Quote:

Pick it apart put it together your way.

I am doing it. This was just a dream about team working and resource sharing. Don't worry, I just turn off the annoiance.
Post 08 Jun 2004, 21:48
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
SamuelGaliza



Joined: 13 May 2004
Posts: 11
SamuelGaliza
There is some code from unicode.org specs.
It´s to convert UTC-4 (UNICODE) to UTF-16 (UNICODE used by Java) and UTF-8 (UNICODE compatible with ASCII).
You can see it at http://www.unicode.org/Public/PROGRAMS/CVTUTF/
Post 09 Jun 2004, 07:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bloglite



Joined: 21 Feb 2004
Posts: 109
Location: East Tennessee U.S.A.
bloglite
Hi Pelaillo,

When compiling the downloaded Locale package with FASM 1.51 in Menuet It will not get past about 2 inc files. The longfilenames~1 seem to be messing it up. Which ver of FASM did you use?

Could filenames be as:

local_es.inc

and

local_en.inc to comply w 8.3 ?




If I understand what you've written MEMUSE will have switchable languages from (es to en) when I get it compiled?

Thanks, Mark
Post 10 Jun 2004, 01:31
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
[quote=boglite]Which ver of FASM did you use?[/quote]

FASM 1.52. I will give a look at what happens.
Quote:
local_en.inc to comply w 8.3 ?

OK. fixed.
Quote:
... when I get it compiled?

The idea is to be able to switch at runtime. Applications should not have strings hardcoded inside but instead ask kernel for string location. It is up to the kernel to decide which language is currently using.

Thanks.
Post 10 Jun 2004, 12:44
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
heh, 8.3? Menuet doesn't support LFN?
Post 10 Jun 2004, 14:01
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.