W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-collation@w3.org > September 2005

Re: comments on draft-newman-i18n-comparator-05.txt

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 17:02:48 +0200
Message-Id: <OBi0Uz7uAiNnYyjFb8pSTg.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>
Cc: Philip Guenther <guenther+collation@sendmail.com>, Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, public-ietf-collation@w3.org

Mark Davis writes:
> > First, I was using the word protocol in the draft's sense, which is so
> > wide that I had protocol for lunch today ;)
>
> If so, then it needs to be clear from the text that 'protocol' is 
> using such a broad sense; examples would help.

To me, the present text is clear. Although now that you say it, perhaps 
it's a little easy to overlook, stuck in the middle of boilerplate. 
I'll make it more prominent. Thanks.

> On the issue of charsets: the biggest problem currently with using 
> charsets other than Unicode is that common IANA identifiers for 
> charsets are ambiguous (see 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/japanese-xml/#ambiguity_of_yen). So two 
> implementations that they are getting the same results from 
> comparison may not be because they are using variant mapping tables.

You will not catch me touching that ;) I'll fight tooth and nail to keep 
other charsets out of the present draft. IMO: It must be possible to 
define collators that use other charsets. But there is absolutely no 
need to define such collators.

Arnt
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2005 15:07:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:54 GMT