Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754728AbdGUUra (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com ([209.85.192.169]:36846 "EHLO mail-pf0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754556AbdGUUr2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:47:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches - change non-ascii character to ascii To: Jonathan Corbet References: <1500600655-7938-1-git-send-email-frowand.list@gmail.com> <20170721112725.45f5f580@lwn.net> Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Frank Rowand Message-ID: <59726853.7050805@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:47:15 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170721112725.45f5f580@lwn.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2216 Lines: 51 On 07/21/17 10:27, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:30:55 -0700 > frowand.list@gmail.com wrote: > >> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst contains a non-ascii >> character. Change it to the ascii equivalent. > > You should know better than to tell somebody like me that a hyphen and an > m-dash are equivalent! :) OK, so they aren't totally equivalent, but close enough. :) Should I have said analog instead of equivalent? And would you prefer '--' to '-'? > I don't have any real objection to this change, but I am curious: is the > m-dash creating a problem somewhere? We have plenty of non-ASCII > characters in Documentation/ and beyond, why change this one? Or to put > it another way, do you think we should have an ASCII-only policy for > documentation files? Ascii is a lowest common denominator. I can view and manipulate the file with any common text editor and common text utilities (eg, cat, grep, etc) on pretty much any Linux system that I walk up to. I don't need to go to any effort to try to figure out what a non-ascii character is (which is exactly what prompted my patch -- I wanted to know what the character my patch modifies is). Yes, I can change my terminal emulator character encoding to UTF-8, and change my LANG to en_US.UTF-8. And now vi and cat show the correct m-dash character. But then how do I grep for m-dash in files? Google tells me I might be able to + + u hex_value_of_mdash to enter an mdash, but I sure don't know what the hex value of mdash is. Plus I need to be observant enough to notice that the string I am grepping for contains an m-dash instead of a dash. And why should I assume "en_US" as the prefix to my UTF-8 LANG? To answer your second question, I would _prefer_ ASCII-only except for cases where being limited to ASCII is restricting the ability to convey information (properly). I would reverse your question, and ask what is the added value of non-ascii characters __in cases similar to this one__, that justifies the negative impact? (Please don't answer what the added value is in cases that are not similar to this one. I know the answer to that question is different.) > Thanks, > > jon >