Re: Where to Add new Currency Sign? -- Cultural adaptability

From: N.R.Liwal (liwal@liwal.net)
Date: Thu Dec 23 1999 - 12:31:29 EST


Hi;

Thanks everyone for the help, Next week I will be to streets of Kabul
and ask people and the Afghan National Bank about this issue
and will inform all accordingly.

Liwal
----- Original Message -----
From: Glen Perkins <Glen.Perkins@nativeguide.com>
To: Unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 1:17 AM
Subject: Re: Where to Add new Currency Sign? -- Cultural adaptability

> One commonsense way of stating the purpose of Unicode is to say that it is
> an attempt to make it possible to encode in a computer, with a single
> encoding, the text that people all over the world already write, or have
> written, on paper. In other words, Unicode doesn't *create* characters, it
> *finds* them and assigns numbers to them. Unicode does not create new
> characters for a literate society that hasn't felt the need to create them
> for themselves.
>
> If the shopkeepers in the markets of Kabul felt they needed a new currency
> character, they could agree on something among themselves and start
drawing
> it with their pens on the signs in their shops. A man with a pen is not
> bound by the decisions of the Unicode Technical Committee. If they're not
> writing any currency symbol with their pens, there's nothing for Unicode
to
> encode.
>
> What do the shopkeepers choose to write with their pens right now? What do
> the Afghani newspapers, with their ability to create any characters they
> want in lead type, use for currency now? When we know the answer, then the
> question becomes, can *that* be encoded in Unicode already? If the answer
is
> no, then there's something to discuss right now. If the answer is yes,
then
> the problem has *already* been "solved by Unicode".
>
> Glen Perkins
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: N.R.Liwal <liwal@liwal.net>
> To: Unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>
> Cc: <sc22wg20@dkuug.dk>; <unicode@unicode.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 2:30 AM
> Subject: Re: Where to Add new Currency Sign? -- Cultural adaptability
>
>
> > As computers are going to be multiligual, therefore the ISO two
charachter
> > of Roman Script may not be acceptable to certin nations, for instance
> > in my country few people can read the roman script and can understand
> > it. Therefore they will not like AFs or AFA for Afghanis. But they
prepare
> > full name of Currency in Pashto (Extened Arabic).
> >
> > This problem can be solved better by UNICODE.
> >
> > Liwal
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <addison@globalsight.com>
> > To: Unicode List <unicode@unicode.org>
> > Cc: <sc22wg20@dkuug.dk>; <unicode@unicode.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 2:39 AM
> > Subject: Re: Where to Add new Currency Sign? -- Cultural adaptability
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Alain wrote:
> > > I have seen but bad usages (including those examples) for this in all
> > > countries I have visited. Even at **most** foreign currency exchange
> > > places, affiliates to banks, which are said to be those who use this
> > > standard.
> > >
> > > That said, the approach remains the global solution in principle. But
> > > education is required. A lot of education. Is it the example of
> > > culturally-neutral identifier? I don't believe so. Addison, a coding
> > > specialist, just demonstrated it once more, but he is far to be alone.
> > >
> > > Well, Alain is being nice... but there is no excuse for not looking up
> the
> > > codes before implementation. I've worked on a few retail systems that
> use
> > > ISO 4127 for multicurrency. Yes, the codes are confusing in many
> cases...
> > I
> > > didn't remember the rule when composing the original message and "just
> > > winged it", which is usually a good way to "eat crow" later.
> > >
> > > There are *difficult* issues surrounding multi-currency. Most system
> > > designers in the U.S. conveniently ignore the issue (you *have* to
have
> > two
> > > fields: one for the value and one for the currency type---assumptions
> are
> > a
> > > very bad idea), and it is not a good idea to invent your own standards
> as
> > > you go along. What you display to the user ("localization") and what
you
> > > actually store *can* be different to reduce confusion, where it makes
> > > sense. However, ISO 4127 *is* the standard and it makes sense to
promote
> > it
> > > as such by displaying it.
> > >
> > > The problem, typically, if faced by multi-country e-tailers. If your
> > > company is in Japan ( = JPY), with a server in Iowa ($ = USD),
> warehouse
> > > in Ireland (= IEP or ? = EUR), and customer in the Czech Republic
> (Koruna
> > > = CSK), what currency do you see? What does each link along the way
see?
> > > How do you pay your shipper? How are each of these formatted? Which
> credit
> > > card clearing house do you access? Answers to these questions could
cost
> > > your company a lot of money is currency conversions, customer
confusion
> or
> > > exchange rate fluctuations.
> > >
> > > ISO 4127 is not a panacea, but it provides a way to begin organizing
> this
> > > mess. Most implentations end up displaying the currency to end-users
> > > explicitly spelled out in the currently selected language (ruble is
not
> > > spelled out in Latin characters in Russia! And, as Roozbeh pointed out
> > > earlier today, not everyone has an explicit currency character already
> > > extant like $--although it looks like Iran does in that part of this
> > > thread). One bad assumption is that everyone's "currency character" is
> one
> > > character long! Sure, pounds and dollars and yen and won all have
> symbols.
> > > But francs typically use two. And position varies. An
> "internationalized"
> > > interface can use ISO 4127 in a pull down box to the left/right of the
> > > value on screen (or in reports) to escape from the variable length and
> > > format problem (at least a little). Of course, there is still the
> question
> > > of numeric format... What's 0.01?
> > >
> > > Some globalization issues are not as easy as they look!
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > Addison
> > >
> > > Addison P. Phillips
> > > Senior Globalization Consultant
> > > Global Sight Corporation
> > >
> > > mailto:addison@globalsight.com
> > > ================================
> > > 101 Metro Drive, Suite 750
> > > San Jose, California 95110 USA
> > > (+1) 408.350.3649 - Phone
> > > http://www.globalsight.com
> > > ================================
> > >
> > > Going global with your web site? Global Sight provides Web-based
> > > software solutions that simplify the process, cut costs, and save
time.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:57 EDT