From keld@dkuug.dk Sun Nov 24 02:58:19 1991 Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA02947; Sun, 24 Nov 91 02:58:19 +0100 Date: Sun, 24 Nov 91 02:58:19 +0100 From: Keld J|rn Simonsen Message-Id: <9111240158.AA02947@dkuug.dk> To: dominic@british-national-corpus.oxford.ac.uk, sc22wg15rin@dkuug.dk Subject: Re: Draft Kista minutes for comment X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 > 1.5. Approval of minutes > The minutes of the May 1991 Rotterdam meeting, as published in WG15 > N170r, were accepted as a true record with the exception of these > points: > > Under 3.2.1.5, those present could agree on the outcome of the > discussion on date formats (see secretary's note in minutes). The > issue is discussed again under 4.14 in these minutes. should read: "those present could not remember the outcome ..." > Under 4.1.1, the sentence Erik van der Poel was strongly against the > inclusion of LC_CTYPE in the locale should read Erik van der Poel was > strongly against the use of the '.codeset' part of XPG3's LANG, i.e. > language[_territory[.codeset]]. Also, Surely, he contended, the > issues of character set and locale should be orthogonal should read > Surely, he contended, the issues of coded character set and locale > should be orthogonal You should use some kind of notation to indicate citation, eg " ". > > 4.1.2. Guideline for national profiles > Keld Simonsen presented RIN N044, Guideline for producing a national > POSIX locale. UniForum and X/Open and DKUUG are working initially on Well, this is RIN and UniForum and... > providing a collection point for locales. DKUUG also provides ftp and > e-mail access to locale definitions. The collection may be thought of > as an an informal registry -- a registry not officially recognized by > ISO/IEC. Several people considered the word 'registry' to be > inappropriate -- the collection could contain alternative locale > descriptions for the same locale, and could make no statement about > which was definitive. A formal registry is a long-term goal, although > it would be likely to be the province of SC22/WG20. > > It was decided to register the document with the status of a discussion > paper. DS will continue collecting locales according to its > recommendations, pending production of a new draft after input from > X/Open and UniForum. Well, it is DKUUG, not DS. > 4.1.3. Guideline for national locales > The group discussed RIN N043, Operational rules for WG15RIN POSIX > locales creation. please use collection instead of creation. > The first issue raised was whether there was a need > for this document to be separate from RIN N045. The group agreed that > there was. Donn Terry pointed out that to combine them would provide > additional input to SGFS -- input which it was not seeking, and which it > might well find confusing. Initially at least, only information on > profiles should be passed to SGFS. Randall Howard added that > locale-related material could potentially be produced more quickly than > solutions to the large problems related to profiling. It made sense to > separate the two. Well, I think the discussion appeared when we looked at the Guidelines for locales paper, not the operational rules paper. > > Keld Simonsen maintained that there were three terms understood in RIN: > profiles picking options from some base standard(s), international > standardized profiles (ISPs), and national profiles. The group remained > unconvinced. Maybe I am wrong and this is not for corrections of the minutes, but to clarify what I said: 1: a profile is the generic term for a specification of assignments of values to options in a base standard, eg what level of intenationalisation is prescribed in 9945-2. 2: an ISP is a profile internationaly standardisized so it can be used for procurements, eg. workstations. 3: a national profile is also a profile, but currently not standardised internationally. > > The group agreed that the paragraph at the bottom of page 3 (The WG15RIN > locale collection) should be cut down to nothing more than a > cross-reference, as it dealt with matters addressed by WG15RIN-N044. > Dominic Dunlop suggested that WG15RIN-N043 should be re-entitled Draft > guideline for producing a national POSIX profile, as it was clear from locale > discussion that it could not yet be regarded as definitive. With these > changes, the document was suitable for registration. > > 4.5. Internationalization background paper > There having been no feedback on Donn Terry's existing draft > (distributed by e-mail), it was agreed that it should be registered on > delivery as a RIN document. The group agreed that it should be > forwarded to WG20 for information. Resolution 59 resulted. > [Secretary's note: the document was subsequently registered as > WG15-N214. It is probably no longer necessary to register it as a RIN > document.] I think it is only fair to register it as a RIN document, as RIN is the origin. > John Hill, looking in on the meeting, queried whether any of the base > documents for the current work of WG15 referred to internationalization > requirements such as that proposed by RIN-N042. Keld Simonsen conceded > that there were no such base documents. I said that there were SC22 plenary resolutions on this issue, and these should be followed. WG15 is not allowed to ignore SC22 resolutions. So please change this paragraph. > 4.9. Current state of ISO 10646 > Keld Simonsen had distributed a brief report to the mail list. The > current DIS (91-09-27) is very similar in its base plane to Unicode, the There is no current DIS, but a current draft DIS. > main difference being that there are more precomposed characters than in > Unicode. No other planes are populated: there is no separate Japanese > plane. At the recent SC22 plenary, a liaison statement from SC22 to SC2 > expressed concern that the base plane now contained null (zero) octets, > which would cause problems to C and POSIX. SC2's response points out > that, in effect, the 10646 base plane uses 16-bit, not 8-bit bytes. > Implementations could be upgraded to use the wider bytes. A two- to > three-octet transformation mechanism specified in the DIS, offered an > alternative solution. (See action RIN9111-7.) The group had > reservations about this. The transformation is one to five octets. > > John Hill wondered if SC2 realized what a threat this issue posed to the > widespread acceptance of the proposed standard. Jim Isaak noted that > SC22 had asked for feedback on the impact of the new 10646 DIS on SC22 > projects, and as to whether acceptance of the new DIS would be likely to > be slower than that of the old DIS. Certainly, the current situation > suggested that WG15 experts should bring the problems to the attention > of those balloting on DIS 10646 (which is not currently in ballot). > Resolution 61 resulted from this discussion. > > 5.2.2. WG21 (C++) > The group meets in the week of 91-11-11 (concurrently with WG20). Keld > Simonsen and SN will attend. SN = Nobuo Saito > > > 5.5. X/Open internationalization > SN is no longer associated with this activity. Contact may resume as a > result of Keld Simonsen' letter to Mike Lambert. SN = Nakao-san > 7.2. Permanent document number assignment > The following document numbers were assigned: > > N043 Denmark Operational Rules for the WG15RIN POSIX Locales Creation Collection, not creation