On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > It seems that at least all the non-Latin-script languages should sort
> > Latin-script
> > the same way, or at least chose between a standard, language-neutral
> > 'correct'
> > sort and an efficient sort.
>
> Probably by default each locale should start off by directly or
> indirectly copying "iso14651_t1" and then apply modifications that
> only change the ordering of the letters used in that language.
>
> However, national standards do sometimes describe how foreign letters
> should be ordered, so there may be some justification for some of the
> apparently eccentric variations.
That may be true of Japanese, but I doubt there's any Korean standard
on sorting foreign letters other than completely outdated KS X 2901.
Although that was reissued in 1997, I believe it's just a verbatim copy
of old KS C 5861 published in early 1990's. As such, its provision for
LC_COLLATE is useless. There's no specification for collation other
than just sorting in terms of code-points. I'm afraid somehow that
blind-code-point sorting was spilled over to ko_KR.UTF-8 definition.
Jungshik Shin
-
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
