Sorry for the duplication if you are on both lists.
The mule-coding, file-coding, and planned general coding features all
will be most convenient if they auto-recognize the coding systems.
Even with native languages, autorecognition can be done with a high
degree of accuracy in most environments.
However, there remains some probability of error, and errors in coding
recognition will definitely produce substantial probability of data
Ben has proposed arranging that all coding transformations be
invertible (except near user changes to the buffer). This could
involve storing large portions of the original file. It also (in
principle) need not let the user know about the potential data loss.
An alternative lighter-weight possibility would be to simply to mark
any positions where potentially non-invertible transformations were
made, and set the buffer read-only. (Of course, the latter action
would be configurable by the user.) A command would be provided so
that the user could traverse the positions where potential problems
were identified, and check for data corruption. I think we would
probably want something like this even if we did provide for full
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________ _________________ _________________ _________________
What are those straight lines for? "XEmacs rules."
Show replies by date