On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 01:41:10PM +0100, Karlsson Kent - keka wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Brady [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 1:30 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: Standards (Re: Arabic in fixed width fonts)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Karlsson Kent - keka wrote:
> >
> > > Keld, please do not pretend that informative documents are normative
> > > just because you want them to be normative. This
> > particular document
> > > was demoted by WG20 **_just because_ it was deemed highly
> > inappropriate
> > > to have 14652 as normative**.
> >
> > Could this debate be taken elsewhere. Perhaps there is a
> > random-standards-pedantry list?
>
> Pedantry or not, it really comes down to whether WG20, SC22,
> or ISO recommends 14652 to be implemented or not. The current
> recommendation is (really) that 14652 is **not** of such a
> quality that implementation is recommended. Which does, of
> course, not forbid anyone to waste their time implementing it.
> But WG20 as a whole finds it to be something that should NOT
> be implemented, due to lack of quality.
Well, WG20 has said that it would publish 14652 as a TR type 1 to
see if the specifications there are adequate. So WG20 encourages
implementation and feedback, so that WG20 can consider in due time
if the TR should be converted to an International Standard.
I am quite happy that much of 14652 has been implemented in glibc 2
and that provisions from it is being used in gettext and other places.
Unicode has been trying to kill the project and actually also to
disband the WG20 group, as they see no need for international
standards in the area of internationalization. They think that industry
standards, such as Unicode, would suffice. Furthermore Unicode do not
appreciate POSIX-like syntax and the POSIX/C locale model, which they claim to be
very implemetation specific and an archaic internationalization model.
Basically they are just fighting for their own standards, which is quite
understandable.
I understand Kent's writings as a part of this quest. However,
Unicode people does not control a majority in the groups involved.
Kind regards
Keld
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/lists/
