On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 01:16:15PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > * there is no reason why a user would want a specific encoding, as > > interaction with Info is through software, so using one that is > > practical and can render any character is a good thing > > Using characters UTF-8 doesn't support is one (albeit rare) case.
Doesn't UTF-8 support all the characters? In general, it is the other way around, some characters are not supported by some other encodings. > Another use case is reading the Info file with a pager on a terminal > that cannot show UTF-8, or in general using the Info file in a > non-UTF-8 locale, where stuff like Grep might produce mojibake or fail > to find non-ASCII text entirely. These are valid cases, but I think that the reverse is getting more and more likely, that terminal show only UTF-8, that locales are more and more UTF-8 and so on. And for these valid cases, it is still possible to set OUTPUT_ENCODING_NAME. > In general, removing features that were supported for a long time is > IMO harsh and should be rarely if ever done. But that's me. It could also be considered that normalizing to UTF-8 is a kind of feature nowadays that UTF-8 is everywhere. > More generally, you asked for opinions, and I provided one. I hope > it's helpful in some way. In any case I will let the last word to Gavin. -- Pat
