From Teruhiko.Kurosaka@eng.sun.com Tue Jan 21 20:14:06 1992 Received: from Sun.COM by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8) id AA06463; Tue, 21 Jan 92 20:14:06 +0100 Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (zigzag-bb.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00769; Tue, 21 Jan 92 11:13:41 PST Received: from cachaca.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05117; Tue, 21 Jan 92 11:12:47 PST Received: by cachaca.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09599; Tue, 21 Jan 92 11:13:37 PST Date: Tue, 21 Jan 92 11:13:37 PST From: Teruhiko.Kurosaka@eng.sun.com (Teruhiko Kurosaka) Message-Id: <9201211913.AA09599@cachaca.Eng.Sun.COM> To: i18n@dkuug.dk, xojig@xopen.co.uk Subject: Re: (XoJIG 444) (i18n.155) Re: support for symbolic names X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Dave, |From xopusw!xopen!XoJIG-request@Sun.COM Tue Jan 21 02:42:08 1992 |Teruhiko Kurosaka comments: | |> Walt Daniels writes: |>> So 90% of the "symbolic" names are just codepoint numbers. Why not just |>> use the numbers for the rest of them and eliminate the European bias! |> I agree with Walt. | |And so we end up at a point where we're going to see code like: | | if (ch == '<540404>') { | ... | |which I posit means we've completely failed at the most basic |goal of internationalization; to offer a system that people |can *use* to help create global programs. My assumption has been that this discussion is about portability of the localized programs.... If we are talking about internationalized program, neither '<540404>' nor LOWER_O_SLASH should appear in it. Only characters that can appear in the internationalized program are from the basic character set. If you have LOWER_O_SLASH in your program, the program is not global. It is limited to the execution environment where such a character is available. -kuro