From erik@sran8.sra.co.jp Tue Aug 13 09:54:11 1991
Received: from mcsun.EU.net by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA09280; Tue, 13 Aug 91 09:54:11 +0200
Received: from srawgw.sra.co.jp by mcsun.EU.net with SMTP;
	id AA04520 (5.65a/CWI-2.101); Tue, 13 Aug 1991 09:54:21 +0200
Received: from srava.sra.co.jp by srawgw.sra.co.jp (5.64WH/1.4)
	id AA26283; Tue, 13 Aug 91 16:55:11 +0900
Received: from sran8.sra.co.jp by srava.sra.co.jp (5.64b/6.4J.6-BJW)
	id AA16341; Tue, 13 Aug 91 16:53:47 +0900
Received: from localhost by sran8.sra.co.jp (5.65/6.4J.6-SJ)
	id AA01901; Tue, 13 Aug 91 16:50:56 +0900
Return-Path: <erik@sran8.sra.co.jp>
Message-Id: <9108130750.AA01901@sran8.sra.co.jp>
Reply-To: erik@sra.co.jp
From: erik@sra.co.jp (Erik M. van der Poel)
To: wg15rin@dkuug.dk, karels@okeeffe.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Re: 1003.2 D11.1 resolution on internationalization
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 91 16:50:32 +0900
Sender: erik@sran8.sra.co.jp
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

Keld writes:
> EvdP wrote:
> > Previously, I made a related comment that the
> > new i18n stuff (not the old i18n stuff) should probably be put
> > somewhere else (not in a draft standard), so that i18n'ers could play
> > with it for a while.
> 
> What is the old i18n stuff?

I simply meant the relatively old, established, accepted stuff. Newer
stuff seems to be problematic, e.g. Mike's regexp concerns.


> And then several international ballots indicated that the draft 9
> i18n was not sufficient, and some more levels for collating was added.
> This satisfied Canada and Denmark, and seems to be sufficient.

Actually, Alain LaBonte', a well-known collation expert from the
communications ministry of Canada, seems to feel that POSIX does not
explain the collation well enough to allow proper implementations.
Perhaps it would be wise to include an informative annex that
describes some of these difficult implementation issues? And perhaps
this would satisfy Mike?


Cheers,
EvdP