`Javier Bezos' wrote
> >> On the other hand using different encodings for a language within one
> >> document is somewhat perverse. So it would be reasonable to have per
> >> document defaults.
> >Yes, but these defaults should depend on the language.
> No - they depends on the system. A Mac file is the same in Spain
> and France. A Linux file is the same in Spain and France. But a
> Spanish file is not the same in Mac and Linux.
Actually you misunderstood me, because I meant "depend on the
language" and not "depend only on the language."
Of course, there can be other parameters, like platform, etc.
So, we could decide a default platform (:-) or make the platform
I do not see why "A Linux file is the same in Spain and France"
should be always true (assuming you mean that such a file is viewed
the same way), because this can depend on the linux configuration,
or on the configuration of your editor. I have a colleague
who has a Russian configuration on his UNIX box and he doesn't
see files as I do.
When you say "Spanish file is not the same in Mac and Linux," you mean
presumably that the keyboard configurations and editor (or other
display programs) are different, but a file is a file!
So, even if there are several kinds of dependences, I still think
that there should be default encodings per language, and if you wish,
per platform (the latter information could be obtained from the inputenc
package, or from a global option for instance).
One thing that should also be clear, is the fact that one can manipulate
text in a given encoding, without actually having a configuration
corresponding to this encoding.
For instance, I have manipulated Russian text in
koi8-r encoding, without actually seeing the characters properly other
than with xdvi. In this case, I really didn't care about what I saw,
nor did I care on the platform.
I only fed the Russian environment with koi8-r text,
and if koi8-r had been the default input encoding, this would have
resulted in no hassle at all.