In article <87llkz47tz.fsf@jbms.ath.cx>, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@attbi.com> wrote:
What I am saying is that operations such as "convert to uppercase" on Unicode strings are locale-independent, and thus such operations need not and should not be part of the locale interface.
To clarify even further, Unicode incorporates some concepts that have traditionally been swept under the locale rug; string encodings and character properties fall in that category. Unicode does not completely replace locale facilities, of course, as it only deals with strings, and not with all other l10n/i18n issues. Furthermore, the locale abstraction is not always compatible with the Unicode abstraction; this is primarily because the locale abstraction defines characters as fixed-size entities and treats many transformations, such as case change, as 1-1 mappings, whereas Unicode uses a more general definition that works in more languages and locales. As a result, just because Unicode and locales both deal with some of the same concepts, that doesn't mean their treatment is compatible. meeroh -- If this message helped you, consider buying an item from my wish list: <http://web.meeroh.org/wishlist>