From: "Vladimir Ivanov" <iranorus@online.ru>
> Thus our problem can be solved in a few simple steps:
>
> Step 1. The authors of the New Collation Algorithm start thinking
> of it as a real problem, not a fairy tale told by myself :-).
I do not think anyone believes that any collation is a fairy tale. But
culturally appropriate collations are not a trivial matter, and every
collation obviously has to (at some level) compete with every other when it
comes to deciding when to do the work.
> Step 2. They state somewhere in Unicode documentation that
> some categories of users can get CUR (Culturally Unexpected
> Results).
One of the changes made to UTS #10 was to explain this very fact about the
default table. So it is already stated. It is true of thousands of diferent
collations, though -- there is no need or desire to make any one specific
language to feel put upon.
> Step 3. Official ISO representatives provide necessary proposals.
This is not required. All that is required for the UCA is for someone to
create an appropriate tailoring. This is not an ISO issue, at all.
> Step 4. Big software manufacturers like Microsoft make some
> corrections for dictionary developers.
Nit: Microsoft does not actually use the UCA for their collation support. So
this is an unrelated issue.
When companies like MS support a specific collation, it is not a matter of
"making corrections", it is a matter of adding a feature of explicitly
supporting a specific collation. The decision to do so has to be weighed
like any other software feature.
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc. -- http://www.trigeminal.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Jul 21 2002 - 00:29:30 EDT