> No, you are making things even worse. > [...] > (They are > likely to try so because current engines are virtually all inferior to > those found in closed-source system) > BTW, on Redmond OS or Mac OS X, if you Google/Baidu for input methods, > most of them would just work. So why not fix and improve the current engines? > Many engines just working well in 1.4 environment. > It's IBus 1.4.99's API change and GNOMEism white list that break them. > I feel that you get cause and effect wrong. But then you just said that the current engines are all inferior to the ones found in Windows and Mac OSX. > No, input methods have flavors. Redmond OS users, OS X users don't > have a consensus of which input method is best. But who cares? They > are more happy in respect to Chinese inputting. I care. GNOME cares. Why are Windows and Mac OSX users more happy with respect to Chinese inputting? Honest question. > I do have the confident to find out at least 100 input methods for > Windows, if you want to see it. How are those 100 input methods presented to the user in Windows? Screenshots? > No, they aren't. > You shouldn't make such claim before you can type a paragraph > independently from > http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnome Let me put it this way. Chinese may well be a fascinating language but it is not the only one which requires complex input methods or rendering. Lets not get into this "you don't know my language" argument. Cheers, Debarshi -- There are two hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
Attachment:
pgpYw1VjhHNJJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature