From keld@osiris.dknet.dk Thu May 4 04:39:52 1995 Received: from ns.dknet.dk by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA26214 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Thu, 4 May 1995 02:40:27 +0200 Received: from osiris.dknet.dk by ns.dknet.dk with SMTP id AA16549 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Thu, 4 May 1995 02:40:26 +0200 Received: from osiris.dknet.dk by osiris.dknet.dk with SMTP (PP) id <23778-0@osiris.dknet.dk>; Thu, 4 May 1995 02:39:59 +0200 Received: by osiris.dknet.dk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23773; Thu, 4 May 95 02:39:54 CET Message-Id: <9505040039.AA23773@osiris.dknet.dk> From: keld@osiris.dknet.dk (Keld J|rn Simonsen) Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 02:39:52 +0200 X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mnemonic-Intro: 29 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.2 4/12/91) To: Johan van Wingen , i18n@dkuug.dk Subject: Re: (i18n.261) NL locale Johan van Wingen writes: > A POSIX Locale for the Netherlands > > The decision was influenced by some rumours that a locale for NL was > already circulating. When we got a copy at last we discovered that the > contents had been produced by a Danish firm with which we had never been > in contact. It goes beyond saying that this caused considerable > irritation, in particular because several details are in direct conflict > with national regulations in our country. The worst case is that of the > character set. I have been producing the said specification on behalf of my firm. This specification has been presented as an expert contribution to CEN/TC304 and referenced there as an example of how a locale could be done for the Netherlands. A number of Dutch experts have been also present at the TC304 meetings discussing locales, so I think that saying that the Netherlands standards body has never been in contact with the firm in question would be exaggerating. We have actually from TC304 invited comments from member bodies, including NNI, and I have as editor of a CEN standard and as per CEN/TC304/WG2 action items approached NNI representatives for comments on the specific locale in question. I regret that this specific locale has caused irritation to NNI. The purpose of including the locale in question in official TC304 documents has been to provide input to the process of creating official national locales, the very process that you are now starting in NNI. CEN/TC304/WG2 (responsible for locale issues) has been of the opinion that it would be fruitful if the member bodies of CEN could cooperate on creating national POSIX locales and benefit from each others' experience. I hope as editor of related standards in the field that NNI sees this way of cooperation as useful and beneficial to them. > The recommendation reads that if the hardware/software is supporting an > ISO coding system, that is, one in accordance with the ISO 2022 > structure, it shall use, fitting to the functional needs, characters > coded in conformance with one of the following standards: > > for the basic set: NEN-ISO/IEC 646 > for Latin-5: ISO 8859-9 > for Teletex: ISO/IEC 6937 > > The "made in Denmark" NL-locale specifies Latin-1 (8859-1). I have changed the specification to refer 8859-9. Thanks for the comment. However, this character set specification has no real influence on the locale specification in question. The locale specification is valid for a number of other coded character sets, including ISO/IEC 646 and ISO/IEC 6937. The charmap specification of ISO_8859-1:1987 has just been used internally for compilation of the locale to test that the locale is valid. > Implementers of locales are warned that use of this Danish version could > make their software unsuitable to government procurement. Should they > suffer loss of business as a result of having based their product on an > unofficial locale, a claim for damages to that Danish firm is perfectly > justified. By no means the said locale is represented as being an official NNI contribution, and it should be taken as just another firms' interpretation of Dutch needs. There are a number of such specifications around from a number of commercial firms. The Danish firm may be one of a few companies that provides its information freely, also for commercial use, on these subjects. I am happy to hear that there will be an official NNI locale, and I would personally recommend everybody to use that specification for Dutch needs, when it becomes available. It is also my personal attitude to cooperate as much as possible with NNI on these issues, as we have done on many other issues. NNI is very welcome to forward further comments to me or CEN/TC304/WG2 on the subject. Keld Simonsen