Re: display table for eight-bit-graphic

[Kenichi Handa]

Sorry for the late reply on this matter.

In article <address@hidden>, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>>  It is definitely intended to use the display table for multibyte
>>  buffers--but I think that's not actually the issue you are talking
>>  about.

>     I'm talking that using the display table in multibyte
>     session is not good.

>>  Anyway, I don't think this actually contradicts anything I said.
>>  The display table is used for unibyte buffers, too.  If we
>>  want unibyte buffers to display the international graphics,
>>  we have to set up the display table for codes 128-255.

>     We don't have to use the display table even for unibyte
>     buffers.  Even for a unibyte buffer,
>     get_next_display_element in xdisp.c doesn't generate a octal
>     form "\XXX" for a code in the range 128-255 if the code can
>     be converted to a multibyte character by
>     unibyte_char_to_multibyte.

> It sounds like you're suggesting that we eliminate the display
> table feature.

No.  The display table is useful even in a multibyte buffer
if Emacs is running on a terminal like the case of MSDOS.
For instance, if one is using a terminal that can display
only ASCII, he may want to setup the display table so that,
for instance, `À' (A-grave) is displayed as "A`".

> Perhaps the display table is obsolete as a means of displaying
> non-ASCII characters, assuming we set up for proper conversion
> to unibyte according to the language in use.  

I think the display table is obsolete only as a means of
displaying 8-bit characaters in unibyte buffer and
eight-bit-control/graphic characters.  At least in the
latter case, they should be displayed by octal-form by
default.

---
Ken'ichi HANDA
address@hidden