Marcos, Arve, On Sep 10, 2007, at 3:48 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote: > > Hi Arve, >> Comparing version lists > ... >> 2. Compare the list items n[p] and m[p] using a natural sort >> algoritm [1] > > I've been reading over the Unicode Collation Algorithm (UCA) [1] and > I'm getting the feeling that requiring implementations to support UCA > (or something similar) would be overkill for version information: > localized strings comparison in an internationalized context gets > quite complicated as you would need to identify which language the > version information is written in, etc, to do it properly. It also > opens up a big can of worms about internationalization support for > just one minor area (versioning), and not for others > (resources/content adaptation). > > Even though I originally pushed for having strings in the version > identifier, after reconsideration I think we should drop back to the > original proposal of just using non-negative integers delimited by a > "." (as Firefox, and Yahoo!'s Widget engine currently does): > > eg. 0.1, 1.0, 1.101.03, etc I tend to agree the original proposal (just using non-negative numbers) should be sufficient for v1.0. If there is a compelling Use Case for a richer syntax that is addressed in a deployed system, perhaps that syntax could be considered in a subsequent version of the spec. Regards, Art Barstow --- > > If people really want string-based versions lists (eg. "Version 1.0 - > (Beta1)"), we can probably add it in version 2 of the spec. > > Any further thoughts? > > > [1] http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr10/ > -- > Marcos Caceres > http://datadriven.com.au >Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2007 11:40:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:22 GMT