[immodule-qt] how about built-in dead key support?

[Zhe Su]

Yes. build dead/multi key support into scim is a good idea. I'm also
thinking about it. However it's impossible to implement it with a
table file of generic table IMEngine.

And I'm thinking if it's better to implement this feature as a proxy
IMEngine in future scim release. Though, it's resonable to write a
special IMEngine for this purpose right now.

But in the other side, implementing this feature in qt is necessary,
because there is not only scim-qtimm. uim-qtimm and iiimqcf etc. are
all need this feature.

Regards
James Su

On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:20:10 +0000, LiuCougar <liucougar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> What do you think if we incorporate the "dead key support" into scim-lib?
> 
> I mean we can write another simple table-based IMEngine for scim, and
> ship it with scim-lib. Another alternative way is to use the generic
> talbe IMEngine and supply the "dead key" tables with scim-lib. ( I
> prefer the later one)
> 
> Because I think, this kind of thing should be supported by scim-lib
> itself: scim-lib can have many frontends, not all of them have
> built-in support for dead keys (now qt-immodule does not have,
> although we can add this feature in near future), and in the future,
> say something like a console based frontend, why should we add this
> dead key support to this console frontend again?
> 
> So I think it makes sense to build this feature into scim-lib itself.
> 
> What's your opinion?
> 
> Regards,
> Cougar
> --
> "People's characters are strengthened through struggle against
> difficulties; they are weakened by comfort."
> - Old Chinese adage
> _______________________________________________
> immodule-qt mailing list
> immodule-qt at freedesktop.org
> http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/immodule-qt
>