From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What exactly is chinese-big5? Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:26:38 +0100 Message-ID: <4808A18E.5090302@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1208609135 31146 80.91.229.12 (19 Apr 2008 12:45:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 19 14:45:53 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jmqe2-0003em-0t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:28:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JmqdN-0007gA-2O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:28:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JmqcV-0007Mj-KH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:27:15 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JmqcU-0007MK-Af for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:27:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JmqcU-0007ME-1I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:27:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mk-outboundfilter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.114.32]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JmqcQ-0008AS-Gx; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:27:10 -0400 Original-X-Trace: 62792701/mk-outboundfilter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com/F2S/$ACCEPTED/freedom2Surf-customers/83.67.23.108 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 83.67.23.108 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: jasonr@gnu.org X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgkFAAw/CEhTQxds/2dsb2JhbACBYKoQ X-IP-Direction: IN Original-Received: from i-83-67-23-108.freedom2surf.net (HELO wanchan.jasonrumney.net) ([83.67.23.108]) by smtp.f2s.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2008 14:27:03 +0100 Original-Received: from [192.168.249.27] (chiko.jasonrumney.net [192.168.249.27]) by wanchan.jasonrumney.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEF971318; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:27:14 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 OpenPGP: id=8086879D X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:95448 Archived-At: Kenichi Handa wrote: > So, if the dialect of > Big5 is different from what defined in those files, there's > a possibility that some character which the file creater > thinks Big5 is encoded into U+FFFD. > Isn't there also a possibility that some character gets encoded into a different utf-8 character if the Big5 dialect is different, or are all characters in Big5 that are encodable as utf-8 common to all dialects?