Hi,

A comment on Noah's statement:  "It seems to me that there
needn't be a binding between language and encoding at all."

This is simply wrong.  In order to capture character values
for the characters used in a given language (the repertoire of
that language), you need an encoding that has codepoints for
all of those characters.  With a few exceptions, if the 
encoding isn't some transform of Unicode/ISO-10646, then the
result is that _many_ languages _cannot_ be encoded.

Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
  High North Inc


-----Original Message-----
From: Noah Levitt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: mixing LANG and LC_CTYPE


On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:35:37 -0500, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Maiorana, Jason wrote:
> 
> > >> Should a combination like LANG=fr_FR LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8
> > >> result in something equivalent to LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8?
> 
>   Even in theory, no if there are differences between French and
> English in character classification, 'case conversion' and so forth.
> Why don't use just use 'LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8' if that's what you want?

In that case, maybe LC_CTYPE should be used only for ctype,
and there should be another setting, not even an LC_ one,
for encoding (e.g., ENCODING). It seems to me that there
needn't be a binding between language and encoding at all.

Noah
--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
--
Linux-UTF8:   i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive:      http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/

Reply via email to