Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author: Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.utf8
>
> "Eli Zaretskii" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Emacs cannot use a pure UTF-8 encoding, since some cultures don't want
> > unification, and it was decided that Emacs should not force
> > unification on those cultures.
>
> Why can't you continue to use the MULE code and just change the
> character sets to reflect certain aspects of Unicode? One such aspect
> is Latin "unification", for example. (The Unicode people get very
> annoyed if you talk about "unification", "source separation rule" etc.
> in the context of non-Han scripts...)
>
> In a second step, support for normalization, combining characters
> etc. would have to be added, but this could be based on the reliable
> foundation of the old MULE code.
>
Does that mean you're painting yourself into a corner, though,
requiring manual work to integrate the increasingly Unicode-based
infrastructure support that is becoming available? Odds are pretty
good that they are.
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
