"works-with::unicode" tag and "rxvt-unicode" package

[Enrico Zini]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:33:59AM +0200, Matej Kosik wrote:

> I would like to ask, whether it makes sense to keep the
> "works-with::unicode" tag for "rxvt-unicode" package?

That is a good question. In 2012, I'd wonder why a 'rxwt-unicode' exists
at all: are there still terminals that don't support unicode?

I mean: if the '-unicode' bit is there for historical reasons, and
pretty much all x terminals support unicode, then I guess there's
nothing special unicode-wise in rxwt-unicode. If there are still
terminals that don't support unicode, or if rxwt-unicode provides some
extra unicode options beyond "it works normally", then I'd say
works-with::unicode makes sense.


> Is there somewhere a document that describes semantics of individual tags?

The tag vocabulary at[1] is the best that we have, although you can see
that not many tags have insightful descriptions. It'd be nice if that
improved, though, and I'd love to see patches that go in that direction
being sent to the list.


[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debtags/vocabulary/trunk/debian-packages?view=markup

Ciao,

Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico at enricozini.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20120113/16b45cd0/attachment.pgp>