[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: documentation bug: Mule and MSDOS

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: documentation bug: Mule and MSDOS
Date: 27 Mar 2001 13:54:39 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.0.101

>>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il> writes:
>> From: dirk janssen <dirkj@br905lap.ntz.uni-leipzig.de>
>> 1. I assumed I had to convert the buffer *after* it was read in
> I don't understand why did you assume this.  Codepages are just
> special encoding of their supported character sets, so what led you to
> think that handling a codepage-encoded file should be fundamentally
> different from how you handle a file encoded in, say, Latin-1?

I might be misreading the original poster, but I think Dirk
also assumed that conversion of latin-1 files was done after
reading the file.  I actually happen to think that it makes
sense from a user point of view: you load a file, then realize that
it doesn't look right and thus want to change the "decoding".
>From an implementation point of view, of course, the conversion is done
as part of the `reading' step.

So maybe we should provide some way to re-decode the file with a different
choice of encoding.  But maybe there is such a thing already (I don't use
Mule nearly enough to know), in which case we should simply advertise it
a bit more.

>> 2. I could find info on disabling multibyte, but not much on enabling it
> ??? I'm probably missing something because I don't see how is this
> related to the problem of visiting files encoded in IBM codepages.

Here again, it was probably meant as a general remark.
Maybe the manual could be slightly improved here, but of course
the simplest choice for users is to not bother with unibyte at all.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]