On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Yu Shao wrote: > Right now, the four Asian locales' definition in X are: > > zh_CN.UTF-8 locale is using en_US.UTF-8's definition, > zh_TW.UTF-8 is using zh_TW.UTF-8 > ko_KR.UTF-8 is using ko_KR.UTF-8 > ja_JP.UTF-8 is using ja_JP.UTF-8 > > Actually the detailed definitions for these four, are exactly the same > except some fs ordering difference due to their similarities in nature, > also thinking about our goal is to define one common UTF-8 locale > ultimately, can we combine these above four locales first? It would be > easy to maintain them. Any comments?
(I see some differences in cs (character set ?) between zh_TW.UTF-8 and en_US.UTF-8, as well as fs ordering). Do we really aim for one common UTF-8 locale; if so do we want locales at all ? I picked a pair of those locales at random and the differences in the fs ordering seemed to encode differeces that are consistent with preferences I've seen expressed by east Asian people on this list. *If* people in different countries prefer different font sets, a locale seems a reasonable way to express that. Andrew C Aitchison Cambridge, UK _______________________________________________ I18n mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/i18n
