[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: etc/HELLO markup etc.
From: |
handa |
Subject: |
Re: etc/HELLO markup etc. |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Dec 2018 16:23:24 +0900 |
In article <address@hidden>, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Which markup is not necessary for display, in your opinion?
> >
> > At most all that's useful is markup that distinguishes Chinese and Japanese
> > variants of Han characters; this might also include hanja (Korean) and Chữ
> > Nôm
> > (Vietnamese) variants if we ever added such characters to etc/HELLO. Such
> > markup
> > might be useful because a significant set of east Asian users dislike
> > Unicode's
> > Han unification and prefer specific variants of Han characters. I'm not
> > aware of
> > any other set of users who dislike unification in that way.
> I'm not yet sure this is only about Han unification. Using charsets
> for specifying fonts is a general feature in Emacs, which can be used
> to control which fonts are selected independently of what the OS
> facilities such as fontconfig do.
> I hope Handa-san will be able to comment on this stuff.
> If Han unification is the only important user of the charset property,
> then yes, we could remove the rest of the charset info from HELLO.
Long ago, the quality of fonts designed for a specific regacy charset
were far better than so-called Unicode fonts even for non-Han charaters.
So, the charset information for non-Han charsets did have some meaning.
But, I don't know the current situation. Perhaps, it is good to remove
them and wait for complaint from users.
---
K. Handa
address@hidden
- Re: etc/HELLO markup etc. (Was: 27.0.50; Use utf-8 is all our Elisp files), (continued)
Re: etc/HELLO markup etc., Eli Zaretskii, 2018/12/28
Re: etc/HELLO markup etc.,
handa <=