From: Antoine Leca (Antoine10646@leca-marti.org)
Date: Fri Apr 23 2004 - 04:18:57 EDT
On Friday, April 23, 2004 7:02 AM
Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> va escriure:
>> due to the strong perception of OpenI18N.org as
>> opensource/Linux advocates, even though CLDR project is not
>> specifically bound to Linux.
>
> It is hard to look at OpenI18N.org's spec and not get the impression
> that all of that group's projects are not bound to some flavour of
> Unix.
While CLDR certainly originates _from_ the Linux community, it is not
_bound_ to it. That is, as far as I understand, it is the same datas as what
use ICU, and to my knowledge, ICU "runs" also on Windows, which is under no
way "bound to [that] flavour of Unix."
Or are you saying that, in as much some are advocating that everything from
Microsoft is so much evil that one should not even touch it, everything that
originates from Linux is not pure enough to be run on other systems? :-)
> The "Scope" clause for several sections are specifically
> expressed in terms of Unix-related implementations (e.g. having the
> scope for rendering requirements expressed as what is needed for X
> Window).
Where are these clauses?
By the way, X Window, while Unix-related, is not bound to it. For example, I
ran for years a X client on a Windows desktop OS, with the server running on
another non-Unix machine. In fact, we did that because the equivalent
technology from Microsoft was at the time, emh, not very mature...
> And even if a section isn't scoped specifically in terms of a
> Unix-derived platform, it may specify requirements that are explicitly
> related to Unix implementations (e.g. that base libraries must support
> POSIX i18n environment variables).
Again, where is it said that CLDR require any form of "base libraries", much
less one that support POSIX variables?
Antoine
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 23 2004 - 05:31:05 EDT