Re: [Groff] Re: preconv supported encodings

2006-01-04 Thread Pedro A . López-Valencia
On 1/3/06, D. E. Evans wrote: >Bruno Haible wrote: > >This list contains no CPxxx encodings, in particular no WINDOWS- >encodings. Microsoft continues to extend these encodings over >and over again, with the result that, say, a text written today >in CP950 on a Windows-XP machi

[Groff] Re: preconv supported encodings

2006-01-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> When I look at the emacs_to_mime conversion table, it already looks > like it contains too many entries. Nobody in his sane mind will ever > write a manpage in CP851 or MAC-ROMAN encoding. Hehe. > Thinking about long-term cost of supporting an encoding. Now is the > moment when we have comple

[Groff] Re: preconv autoconfigury

2006-01-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> Here's a little bit of advice on the autoconf stuff for preconv. Thanks a lot! I've applied your patch as-is. > - For nl_langinfo(CODESET), there is a macro AM_LANGINFO_CODESET > in gnulib. One file: > m4/codeset.m4 > Alternatively, you can also use the gnulib module 'localcharset', >

[Groff] Re: preconv

2006-01-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> XEmacs 21.5.24 appears to have the following coding-systems (excluding > useless iso-2022 variants): [...] Thanks a lot! I've updated the conversion table accordingly. Werner ___ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/l

[Groff] Re: coding tags and utf-16

2006-01-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
> > There is a serious problem with coding tags and utf-16 encodings > > of any flavour: Emacs simply can't recognize the tag. This is a > > non-trivial problem. > > Sorry for the late reply, but I think coding tag is useless for a > file encoded in some of utf-16 variants. > > If a file has BOM