From: Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜) [mailto:jungs...@google.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:34 PM
As for the locale identifiers, my understanding is that Windows APIs (newer
'name-based' locale APIs) more or less follows BCP 47.
Picking this back up from this August thread. I went
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
However I think it's very rare that this will be needed. And there
are
ways to somewhat work around it by using separate databases. So I
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Jungshik Shin (신정식, 申政湜)
jungs...@google.com wrote:
+ adding the authors of BCP 47 (Mark Davis and Addison Phillips) and
Richard Ishida (w3c i18n)
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM,
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org
wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:20 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
However I think it's very rare that this will be needed. And there are
ways to somewhat work around it by using separate databases. So I
would probably say that lets keep it database-wide for now, and
reconsider in
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
2 additional questions: What standard will define the language codes and
the associated collation algorithm? And what's the behavior for an
implementation that doesn't support that particular language?
Very good
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro
pablo.cas...@microsoft.com
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.comwrote:
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
I think we should first break down the use cases and look at how many of
them just need _a_
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.com
wrote:
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy
Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
I think we should
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pablo Castro
pablo.cas...@microsoft.com
wrote:
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf
Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
Then you won't have to hint the locale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_collation_algorithm
CouchDB uses some definitions around sorting complex types like arrays and
objects but when it comes down to sorting strings it just defaults to to
From: Mikeal Rogers [mailto:mikeal.rog...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:35 PM
Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
Then you won't have to hint the locale.
Unless I'm missing something, the UCA defines the general algorithm for
collating strings but you
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Pablo Castro pablo.cas...@microsoft.comwrote:
From: Mikeal Rogers [mailto:mikeal.rog...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:35 PM
Why not just use the unicode collation algorithm?
Then you won't have to hint the locale.
Unless I'm missing
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
pablo.cas...@microsoft.com wrote:
We had some discussions about collation algorithms and such in the past, but
I don't think we have settled on the language aspect of it. In order to have
stores and indexes sort character-based keys in a way that
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
pablo.cas...@microsoft.com wrote:
We had some discussions about collation algorithms and such in the past,
but I don't think we have settled on the language aspect of it. In
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:18 AM
I think we should first break down the use cases and look at how many of
them just need _a_ sort order, how many of them a per-database sort order is
ok, and how many of them
From: jor...@google.com [mailto:jor...@google.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Orlow
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:36 AM
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Pablo Castro
pablo.cas...@microsoft.com wrote:
We had some
17 matches
Mail list logo
