Thanks Ken & Mark for note. I defer to your opinion in this. -James Seng
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kenneth Whistler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [idn] call for comments for REORDERING > Ken is right; collation is *quite* complex. Anyone wanting to see some of > what is involved can look at the ICU implementation (which is UCA and ISO > 14651 compliant, and open-source): > > User Guide: > http://www-124.ibm.com/icu/userguide/Collate_Intro.html > > Internal Design: > http://oss.software.ibm.com/cvs/icu/~checkout~/icuhtml/design/collation/ ICU_ > collation_design.htm > (source files are linked from there) > > ICU home: > http://oss.software.ibm.com/icu/ > > While the perfomance is good, the code is many, many orders of magnitude > more complicated than the current nameprep. It is not appropriate for IDN. > > Mark > > ————— > > Δός μοι ποῦ στῶ, καὶ κινῶ τὴν γῆν — >Ἀρχιμήδης > [http://www.macchiato.com] > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kenneth Whistler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 8:28 PM > Subject: Re: [idn] call for comments for REORDERING > > > > James Seng said: > > > > > Third, I would really prefer to reference a work from established expert > > > group if possible. For example, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG20 publishes ISO > > > 14651 on weighted sorting. I am not sure how ISO 14651 would perform for > > > the IDN purpose but I thought it might be worthwhile to examine. > > > > As one of the principal authors of ISO 14651, who has also implemented > > the synchronized Unicode Technical Standard #10, the Unicode Collation > > Algorithm, I can attest that this is a very tricky and complicated > > area, and the algorithms to do all this correctly are not the kind > > you can write on the back of a cocktail napkin. It is very complex > > to get all the details right and to get good-performing algorithms > > (in speed and in resource usage). It is also very difficult for > > independent implementations to get themselves all exactly lined > > up, and even more difficult for independent implementations to *prove* > > that they are getting the same results for all data (as opposed to > > a particular result for one set of data -- which is pretty easy). > > > > IDN doesn't need to add this kind of headache to the already > > complex enough issues of nameprep. > > > > > > > > Whatever the case, we should make a decision quickly on this. Lets not > > > drag this further if possible. > > > > > > -James Seng > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Martin Duerst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > So this is a solution in search of a real problem, > > > > not worth bothering the whole world with additional > > > > complexity. > > > > I heartily concur with Martin's assessment. > > > > --Ken Whistler > > > > > > >
