From ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org Wed Mar 4 14:49:25 1998 Received: from mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org (mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org [192.153.166.4]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA05711 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 14:49:24 +0100 Received: by mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org; id AA29768; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:51:13 GMT Message-Id: <9803041351.AA29768@mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org> Received: from mailhome [192.153.166.5] by mailgate.rdg.opengroup.org via smtpd ; Wed Mar 04 13:51 GMT 1998 Received: by mailhome.rdg.opengroup.org (1.36.108.10/16.2) id AA06456; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:40:45 GMT From: ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org (Andrew Josey) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 13:40:45 +0000 Reply-To: ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org (Andrew Josey) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92) To: sc22wg15@dkuug.dk Subject: Defect Report concerning: IEEE Std. 1003.2-1992, ISO/IEC 9945-2:1993 - Shell & Utilities For the attention of the WG15 Project Editors. Defect Report concerning: IEEE Std. 1003.2-1992, ISO/IEC 9945-2:1993 - Shell & Utilities Defect report number: IS9945-2#158 Clause: P48 LL1464-1466 clause 2.5.2 PASC Interpretation Ref: pasc-1003.2-158 Topic: locale ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1003.2-92 #158 _____________________________________________________________________________ Interpretation Number: xxxx Topic: locale Relevant Sections: P48 LL1464-1466 clause 2.5.2 PASC Interpretation Request: (Defect Report) ---------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 05:11:47 -0600 From: ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org (Andrew Josey) WG15 Status Block (official use only): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Defect report number: IS9945-2#158 2 Submitter: IEEE PASC March 4 1998 3 Addressed to: JTC1/SC22 /WG15 editor's group on ISO 9945-2 4 WG secretariat: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5 Date circulated by WG secretariat: 6 Deadline on response from editor: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7 Defect Report concerning (number and title of International Standard or DIS final text, if applicable): Shell & Utilities: IEEE Std 1003.2-1992 (ISO 9945-2:1993) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8 Qualifier (e.g. error, omission, clarification required): 3 Error=1 , Omission=2, Clarification=3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9 References in document (e.g. page, clause, figure, and/or table numbers): P48 LL1464-1466 clause 2.5.2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10 Nature of defect (complete, concise explanation of the perceived problem): There appears to be a contradiction in the standard: Section 2.5.2 Locale Definition Rule 1 says: 1. A character can be represented via a symbolic name, enclosed within angle brackets "<" and ">". The symbolic name, including the angle brackets, must exactly match a symbolic name defined in the charmap file specified via the localedef -f option, and will be replaced by a character value determined from the value associated with the symbolic name in the charmap file. The use of a symbolic name not found in the charmap file constitutes an error, unless the category is LC_CTYPE or LC_COLLATE, in which case it constitutes a warning condition (see localedef for a description of action resulting from errors and warnings). The specification of a symbolic name in a collating-element or collating-symbol section that duplicates a symbolic name in the charmap file (if present) is an error. Use of the escape character or a right angle bracket within a symbolic name is invalid unless the character is preceded by the escape character. ll 1459-1466 state Implementations may accept single-digit octal, decimal or hexadecimal constants following the escape character. Only characters existing in the character set for which the locale definition is created can be specified, whether using symbolic names, the characters themselves, or octal, decimal or hexadecimal constants. If a charmap file is present, only characters defined in the charmap can be specified using octal, decimal or hexadecimal constants. Symbolic names not present in the charmap file can be specified and will be ignored, as specified under item 1 above. So which is it? If I use a symbolic name which is not defined in the charmap file, is this an error or is it ignored? I'd propose that the text in 1464 be better worded as below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 11 Solution proposed by the submitter (optional): Change P48 ll 1464-1466 to: Symbolic names not present in the charmap file are handled as specified under item 1 above. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Interpretation response ------------------------ The standards states two different behaviours, and either implementations are allowed to be conforming. However, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor. Rationale ------------- None. Note to Technical editor (not part of this interpretation): ---------------------------------------------------------- In a future revision make the change suggested in section 11. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12 Editor's response (any material proposed for processing as a technical corrigendum to, an amendment to, or a commentary on the International Standard or DIS final text is attached separately to this completed report): See interpretation response above ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Forwarded to Interpretations group: December 10 1997 Proposed resolution: January 13th 1998 Finalised: March 4th 1998 ----- Andrew Josey PASC Functional Chair Interpretations The Open Group Apex Plaza,Forbury Road, Reading,Berks.RG1 1AX,England Tel: +44 118 9508311 ext 2250 Fax: +44 118 9500110 Email: a.josey@opengroup.org