[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unicode/Mule (Re: null-device)
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Unicode/Mule (Re: null-device) |
Date: |
19 Jul 2001 15:19:51 +0900 |
Karl Eichwalder <address@hidden> writes:
> And then this rule "é" != "é" (in case you're using different charsets).
> Why doesn't this rule apply for "a", too? I believe I know the reason:
> Emacs/Mule forces "western" users to accept special far east
> assumptions.
Please do not propagate Erik Naggum's bigotry (and I do not use such a
strong word lightly -- it's quite clear from his writings that he is a
bigot).
You can argue that linking characters to particular character sets is a
bad technical decision, but to call it a `special far east assumption'
is just dumb.
I think you and I have a different idea of what `mule' is -- I consider
it the sum of all the various pieces of emacs that support multi-lingual
editing, of which the current internal representation is but a small
part. When emacs' internal representation is changed, a great deal of
this can remain exactly the same, especially as far as the
user-interface is concerned.
That's why your statement that `mule has to go away first' seems
nonsensical to me. Of course, _part_ of mule must go -- the part that's
being replaced, and any other parts that are too closely dependent on
that representation -- but to say _all_ of mule must go is ignorant of
what mule is. [of course, it's possible that the majority of people use
the word `mule' in a much more narrow sense, to refer specifically to
the current internal encoding, in which case I'll happily admit to being
wrong!]
-Miles
--
Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over,
pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche