Re: New external dependecy request (ICU)
- From: hiura openi18n org (Hideki Hiura)
- To: desktop-devel-list gnome org, gnome-i18n gnome org
- Subject: Re: New external dependecy request (ICU)
- Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:37:22 -0800 (PST)
> From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <email@example.com>
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:44:46PM +0330, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
> > Aren't some national bodies trying to kill it? Won't they try to stop
> > amendments?
> Yes, there are national bodies that wants to kill it, including the USA
> and Japan.
Yes, those national bodies are strongly against TR 14652.
Note that TR(Technical Report) and IS(International Standard) are
two distinctive things. Please do not get confused.
> I think one of the problems that the USA has with TR 14652, is
> that they say that it is not implementable, and it is not used or
> required by anybody. If Gnome would participate in the development, and
> say that they think they will use it, it may be that the USA would be
> more favourable. I dont know. They do tend to give some priority to
> practical things.
Well, it would probably be good for people to know the other angle to
see the whole picture I guess...
As far as I witnessed as a member of the U.S. national body, the
biggest concern I have been hearing from the U.S. natinal body members
on TR 14652 is its quality. It's been too immature for so long and
dragging so long and national bodies who are asked to continue
debugging such immature draft TR did not find the way out. Some
national bodies seem not to care on its covarage and quolity as a
whole, but the national bodies who really care about its implication
on multilinguality and future integrity with the trend on
multilinguality strongly against it.
> Another thing is that the US national body in this respect is very
> dominated by Unicode people, which has some tendency to just want
> their own specifications.
I do not find any evidence that this statement is true.
It is true that many U.S. national body members are also Unicode
Technical Committee voting member, as I am, however, it does not
necessarily mean that they just want "their own specifications"
even if there is any.
As Unicode technical committee has been clearly communicating that
they do not have a plan to create "their own specifications" beyond
Unicode Standard itself, which is just a coded character set.
Which "their own specifications" are you refering to??
Chair, OpenI18N.org/The Free Standards Group http://www.OpenI18N.org
Architect/Sr. Staff Engineer, Sun Microsystems, Inc, USA eFAX: 509-693-8356
] [Thread Prev