* Coding systems documentation
@ 2008-11-30 16:43 Richard M Stallman
2008-11-30 21:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Richard M Stallman @ 2008-11-30 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
+@c I think this paragraph is no longer correct.
+@ignore
Most coding systems specify a particular character code for
conversion, but some of them leave the choice unspecified---to be chosen
heuristically for each file, based on the data.
+@end ignore
I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: Coding systems documentation
2008-11-30 16:43 Coding systems documentation Richard M Stallman
@ 2008-11-30 21:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 1:30 ` Kenichi Handa
2008-12-01 14:06 ` Richard M Stallman
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2008-11-30 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rms; +Cc: emacs-devel
> From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 11:43:56 -0500
>
> +@c I think this paragraph is no longer correct.
> +@ignore
> Most coding systems specify a particular character code for
> conversion, but some of them leave the choice unspecified---to be chosen
> heuristically for each file, based on the data.
> +@end ignore
>
> I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
Is this only about undecided? or are there other examples?
If it's only about undecided, I'd like to rewrite this text to speak
explicitly about undecided. Then it won't sound so mysteriously.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Coding systems documentation
2008-11-30 21:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2008-12-01 1:30 ` Kenichi Handa
2008-12-01 4:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 14:06 ` Richard M Stallman
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kenichi Handa @ 2008-12-01 1:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: rms, emacs-devel
In article <uoczwlx0q.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> > From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> > Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 11:43:56 -0500
> >
> > +@c I think this paragraph is no longer correct.
> > +@ignore
> > Most coding systems specify a particular character code for
> > conversion, but some of them leave the choice unspecified---to be chosen
> > heuristically for each file, based on the data.
> > +@end ignore
> >
> > I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
> Is this only about undecided? or are there other examples?
All coding systems that don't have -unix, -dos, and -mac at
the tail leaves the choice of eol-format unspecified. But,
if you are going to mention about eol-format at the
different place, yes, `undecided' is the only coding that
doesn't specify how text is encode.
> If it's only about undecided, I'd like to rewrite this text to speak
> explicitly about undecided. Then it won't sound so mysteriously.
It seems to be a good idea.
By the way, "specify a particular character code for
conversion" is a little bit strange. "specify a particular
conversion rule between an encoded byte sequence and a
character sequence." is more accurate (and I think clearer).
---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Coding systems documentation
2008-12-01 1:30 ` Kenichi Handa
@ 2008-12-01 4:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 5:22 ` Kenichi Handa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2008-12-01 4:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kenichi Handa; +Cc: rms, emacs-devel
> From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> CC: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:30:49 +0900
>
> > > +@c I think this paragraph is no longer correct.
> > > +@ignore
> > > Most coding systems specify a particular character code for
> > > conversion, but some of them leave the choice unspecified---to be chosen
> > > heuristically for each file, based on the data.
> > > +@end ignore
> > >
> > > I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
>
> > Is this only about undecided? or are there other examples?
>
> All coding systems that don't have -unix, -dos, and -mac at
> the tail leaves the choice of eol-format unspecified.
Yes, but the above says "character code", so it's about text
conversion, not eol conversion.
> By the way, "specify a particular character code for
> conversion" is a little bit strange. "specify a particular
> conversion rule between an encoded byte sequence and a
> character sequence." is more accurate (and I think clearer).
Right.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Coding systems documentation
2008-12-01 4:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2008-12-01 5:22 ` Kenichi Handa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kenichi Handa @ 2008-12-01 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: rms, emacs-devel
In article <ufxl8leke.fsf@gnu.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> > From: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
> > CC: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:30:49 +0900
> >
> > > > +@c I think this paragraph is no longer correct.
> > > > +@ignore
> > > > Most coding systems specify a particular character code for
> > > > conversion, but some of them leave the choice unspecified---to be chosen
> > > > heuristically for each file, based on the data.
> > > > +@end ignore
> > > >
> > > > I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
> >
> > > Is this only about undecided? or are there other examples?
> >
> > All coding systems that don't have -unix, -dos, and -mac at
> > the tail leaves the choice of eol-format unspecified.
> Yes, but the above says "character code", so it's about text
> conversion, not eol conversion.
LF and CR are also character code.
> > By the way, "specify a particular character code for
> > conversion" is a little bit strange. "specify a particular
> > conversion rule between an encoded byte sequence and a
> > character sequence." is more accurate (and I think clearer).
> Right.
Then, the distinction of text conversion and eol conversion
should be stated beforehand.
---
Kenichi Handa
handa@ni.aist.go.jp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Coding systems documentation
2008-11-30 21:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 1:30 ` Kenichi Handa
@ 2008-12-01 14:06 ` Richard M Stallman
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Richard M Stallman @ 2008-12-01 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: emacs-devel
> I think these still exist. For example, there are `undecided' and friends.
Is this only about undecided? or are there other examples?
I think it is only that, plus the issue of line-end conversion.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-12-01 14:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-11-30 16:43 Coding systems documentation Richard M Stallman
2008-11-30 21:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 1:30 ` Kenichi Handa
2008-12-01 4:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-12-01 5:22 ` Kenichi Handa
2008-12-01 14:06 ` Richard M Stallman
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).