RE: ASCII-folded search [was: Re: Upcoming loss of usability ...]

[Drew Adams]

> > However, as has been discussed in several threads in the past,
> > here and in the bug list, there are several char-folding
> > possibilities that we might want to offer.
> >
> > There are any number of reasonable, default character equivalence
> > classes that you can think of.  And users themselves can come up
> > with any number of other such equivalence classes, some of which
> > are specific to a particular context.
> 
> True, and which equivalence classes to offer is a whole new topic
> all by itself. But the implementation is there now, all it takes
> it to offer more tables for it.

OK, you keep advertising that.  But it is irrelevant to the
discussion of whether to indicate char folding in the mode-line.
How we do char folding doesn't matter in this context.

What is relevant is that multiple kinds of char folding mean that
it makes little sense to try to indicate them in the mode-line.

IOW, we should not even think about going down that road, unless
someone has a brilliant idea of how to handle a plethora of char
foldings.