From keld@dkuug.dk Sun Dec  1 16:50:21 1991
Received: by dkuug.dk (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA00472; Sun, 1 Dec 91 16:50:21 +0100
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 91 16:50:21 +0100
From: Keld J|rn Simonsen <keld@dkuug.dk>
Message-Id: <9112011550.AA00472@dkuug.dk>
To: XoJIG@xopen.co.uk, da@xopen.co.uk
Subject: Re:  (XoJIG 399) Re: (XoJIG 393) Locale Registry (fwd)
Cc: sc22wg15rin@dkuug.dk
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

> Please forgive me, but up till now, I was under the impression that you
> (and others) had been promoting X/Open as the most suitable
> organisation to define and establish a locale registry. I am more than
> happy if ISO is going to do this, since I was always a little uneasy
> about X/Open getting into this business.

I do not know how well my messages get thru, but the intention
from RIN has been to do an informal ISO registry, that we in due
time will make into a full ISO registry.

> 	Anyway, does this mean that as far as the JIG is concerned,
> 	we have nothing to do in this area?

No, WG15RIN would very much appreciate the cooperation with XoJIG,
with defining the service so that the service can be useful to the
users and the industry.

This experience I think will prove very useful  when the ISO standard
for the locale registry will be produced.

> 	If so:
> 		How will we be informed of progress, since our two
> 		projects have dependencies on it?

RIN intends to work closely with XoJIG on this and will informally
report on the progress via the i18n@dkuug.dk email list, which
also includes all of the XoJIG participants.

Formally RIN will ask X/Open to provide a contact person to RIN, who
will have a standing invitation to attend all RIN meetings.
I am actioned to write a letter to Mike Lambert on this.

> 		Can JIG do anything to help expedite things?

Yes, indeed.

Some points that I can think of are:

1. Use the existing RIN "registry" for registering locales and charmaps.
   RIN calls this a "collection of locales" as we are not allowed to
   use the term registry - there is no ISO standard for the locale
   registry yet. The RIN "registry" uses the naming rules stated in
   ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 section E.1.3 (this is very like the old X/Open
   specification).  Using the existing RIN "registry" will get
   information recorded on a lot of different cultures, and can 
   provide a good basis for doing harmonised locales (we hope to
   really reduce the numbers of locales needed by eliminating 
   unnessecary differences). The RIN locale "registry" is also open to
   commercial firms such as hardware and software manufacturers.

2. review and comment the RIN papers i18n.116 i18n.117 and i18n.118
   (which are different from the WG20 paper Dean cited). These papers
   define a more rigid form of the RIN locale "registry" and 
   guidelines for writing locales. i18n.117 was written to reflect
   the requirements that XoJIG agreed upon in Toronto.

3. RIN wants XoJIG to especially look into the naming of locales,
   and report to RIN. RIN has a proposal in i18n.117 with comments
   in i18n.118 .  The statement in i18n.118 about the length of the name
   should only be taken as a concern, not an ISO "should" requirement.

4. Try to work with the i18n.116 guideline when producing locales
   and report on what problems you get.

The i18n papers are available by ftp and email from dkuug.dk
in the directory JTC1/i18n . They have already been distributed to 
the XoJIG list.
   
Keld Simonsen