[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Clarification of discussion



I am trying to follow this discussion as it pertains to the original question (which I've long since deleted, due to space considerations).

Am I to understand that from what Keld, Martin, and Jonathan are saying, you cannot "have your universal CLASS and name it too?"  (This is a play on an English expression, sorry for those not familiar.)  What I mean is, it sounds to me that in order to have a universal CLASS name/definition/type/whatever the original question was, it would have to be constrained to Latin-1 characters with no inscripts, subscripts, or superscripts, glyphically speaking.  The characters must have unambiguous Unicode/10646 representations.

If the CLASS name/definition/type/thing is named using anything other than these characters, then the implementation would be locale and language specific.

Or have I misunderstood?

Andrea Vine
Software internationalization and localization consultant
avine@eng.sun.com
droido@ix.netcom.com

Rapidly decomposing in the muck and mire of standards discussion...


Follow-Ups: