Re: Li18nux Locale Name Guideline Public Review
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 07:18:09PM +0900, Tomohiro KUBOTA wrote:
> I found the 2nd public review of Li18nux Locale Name Guideline
> has started.
> The page says that comments are welcome until 14 Feb 2002.
Starting from the top:
This is Linux, not proprietary Unixes. What is the point of not
standardizing on the IANA names, especially when you don't standardize
on the Unix ones, either? Especially - TCA-Big5 and TCA-BIG5-HKSCS.
Lovely names there.
It doesn't seem that the authors were very familiar with the IANA names,
as BIG5-HKSCS, ISO-8859-13, ISO-8859-15 and TIS-620 are registered.
Why all the IBM code pages? glibc currently supports two - 1251 (be_BY,
bg_BG) and 1255 (yi_US). Is there anyone who really needs all the
others? They are a step backward on Unix.
They're missing a bunch of charsets currently in glibc's supported list.
glibc does not and will not support VISCII, as it puts graphic
characters in the ASCII range. And I'm sure Ulrich Drepper will bite
your head off for even asking.
As a final note - why does this exist? Linux has a locale standard, in
the same way that Perl has a standard - it's called glibc. If you feel
compelled to write a formal standard, you have to write one that defines
what the standard implementation does.
David Starner - email@example.com, dvdeug/jabber.com (Jabber)
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
When the aliens come, when the deathrays hum, when the bombers bomb,
we'll still be freakin' friends. - "Freakin' Friends"