|
Boost : |
From: Miro Jurisic (macdev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-14 00:07:43
In article <87llkz47tz.fsf_at_[hidden]>, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms_at_[hidden]>
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>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk