From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kenichi Handa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: BIG5-HKSCS? Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:07 +0900 (JST) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200311130534.OAA04940@etlken.m17n.org> References: <200311130153.KAA04615@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1068701969 23623 80.91.224.253 (13 Nov 2003 05:39:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 05:39:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 13 06:39:26 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AKACU-0006q0-00 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 06:39:26 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AKACN-0001Nm-00 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 06:39:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AKB5t-00057U-3K for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:36:41 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AKB5Z-00057M-Tc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:36:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AKB53-00054c-2o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:36:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.47.44.130] (helo=tsukuba.m17n.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AKB52-00054N-Ci for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:35:48 -0500 Original-Received: from fs.m17n.org (fs.m17n.org [192.47.44.2]) by tsukuba.m17n.org (8.11.6p2/3.7W-20010518204228) with ESMTP id hAD5Y7h07983; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:07 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from handa@m17n.org) Original-Received: from etlken.m17n.org (etlken.m17n.org [192.47.44.125]) by fs.m17n.org (8.11.6/3.7W-20010823150639) with ESMTP id hAD5Y7s09754; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:07 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: (from handa@localhost) by etlken.m17n.org (8.8.8+Sun/3.7W-2001040620) id OAA04940; Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:34:07 +0900 (JST) Original-To: jas@extundo.com In-reply-to: (message from Simon Josefsson on Thu, 13 Nov 2003 05:14:11 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:17795 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:17795 In article , Simon Josefsson writes: > Good enough for me. Do you have an opinion on whether falling back to > BIG5 when BIG5-HKSCS is not available [in Gnus, for displaying > incoming e-mail in BIG-5HKSCS], is a reasonable behaviour? > I browsed the BIG5-HKSCS specification, and it appear to add lots of > characters (~1500) but it didn't seem to alter any Hmmm, if that is true, it's possbile to support it in the current Emacs. Emacs repsents Big5 characters in two charsets chinese-big5-1 and chinese-big5-2 internally. The former contains Big5 chars #xA140 .. #xC8FE, the latter #xC940..#xFEFE. That means that chinese-big5-1 still has a room for that additional 1500 character. > , and I can't tell > whether the additions are critical or just rarely used symbols. I > doubt rendering it as BIG5 is worse than QP, though, which is the > current behaviour. If BIG5-HKSCS surely just adds characters to BIG5, I think it is reasonable to fallback to BIG5. But, as I wrote above, it seems possible to support the whole BIG5-HKSCS in the current Emacs with a faily small effort. Could you please wait for a while? --- Ken'ichi HANDA handa@m17n.org