Re: utf-16le vs utf-16-le

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

> Eli Zaretskii writes:
>
>  > > Huh?  We don't have the full suite, but we do have -signature variants.
>  > 
>  > Bot for UTF-8, we don't, at least not in GNU Emacs 23.
>
> We're not talking about GNU Emacs 23, we're talking about what should
> be.  What I'm trying to say is that all of these variants are
> occasionally useful, and they can be decomposed as text coding +
> signature + EOL convention, rather than having a zillion variants with
> weird names for the user to keep track of.

Well, the solution is then systematic names...

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum