Re: Several serious problems

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>     I'm quite confused with the current status of utf-8.el,
>     ucs-tables.el, utf-16.el, utf-8-subst.el, etc in HEAD and
>     RC.

> Do you understand the situation in HEAD?

I don't understand what exactly do you mean by "situation".

I don't know if they are the same as what Dave currently
has.

I understand how each functions and variables are supposed
to work.  And, I know that those codes doesn't do definitely
wrong thing by reading through the codes briefly.

But, I have not checked if they surely works as
expected.  I believe Dave has done it.

And, I don't understand why those many functions/variables
are designed as the current way.  For instance,

(1) Why does loadup.el has this code:
        (ucs-unify-8859 'encode-only)
instead of:
        (unify-8859-on-encoding-mode 1)

(2) Why doesn't utf-8-subst.el provide mappings of
    non-Chinese characters for ksc, gb, and jisx charsets?
    The document of utf-8-translate-cjk says as below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether the `mule-utf-8' coding system should encode many CJK characters.

Enabling this loads tables which enable the coding system to encode
characters in the charsets `korean-ksc5601', `chinese-gb2312' and
`japanese-jisx0208', and to decode the corresponding unicodes into
...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but, currently only Chinese characters in those charsets are
handled.

(3) Why is utf-8-translate-cjk a variable, not a minor-mode
    like unify-8859-on-(de/en)coding-mode?  Or, why the
    latter is not a simple variable?   By the way, it seems
    that once we customize utf-8-translate-cjk to t,
    customize it back to nil doesn't cancel the translation.

(4) It seems that the variable name
    utf-8-fragment-on-decoding is not appropriate because it
    is used also in utf-18.el.  Perhaps,
    ucs-fragment-on-decoding is better.

(5) It seems that mule-utf-16 can handle the same range of
    characters as mule-utf-8, but `safe-charsets' property
    doesn't contain, for instance, `latin-iso8895-2'.
    Perhaps, this is simply a bug to be fixed easily.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden