At 10:19 97-02-06 -0500, Xiao-He Zhang wrote:
>Please correct me if I'm wrong. Did you imply, by using your name
>as an example, that *no* locale changes the order of *any* Latin
>letter at level 1? I thought, (perhaps I imagined ;-), that Mark's
>fear was that somewhere there could be a locale which makes words
>sorted differently even at the first level.
I did not mean that. I meant that with ISO/IEC CD 14651, without changing
locales, you can do a rich series of operations with a single call to a
comparison function that is well designed, in line with a [GUIDE] SHARE
Europe (now GSE) requirement backed and enhanced by SHARE Inc. 7 or 8 years
ago (GSE is an observer member of ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20).
>If in reality the answer to my question is "yes", then the locale
>issue is handled by "tailoring" at lower levels. Correct?
Tailoring can be done at all levels. It is done so that minimum tailoring
will be required to a huge (worldwide) table though, for local and
legitimate rightness of small details that would not change the big order...
>On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Alain LaBont/e'/ wrote:
>> >Do I need different version of the UCS2 locale for each possible
>> >interpretation of "[a-z]" I need for Vietnamese?
>> That's the idea of a traditional locale. However in ISO/IEC CD 14651 we
>> completely redefine the comparison operation (we introduce the concept of
>> equivalence at different levels of comparison) and that allows you to do all
>> that with a single operation without changing locales...
>> Hence "La Bonté" is equivalent to "labonte" at level 1, it is not at level 2
>> or higher... it is equivalent to "labonté" at level 2, it is not at level 3
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:34 EDT