Re: Comparison between CLDR and POSIX

[Bruno Haible <bruno clisp org>]

Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
> > <layout>               LC_GUI ?
>
> I don't get your question mark. Is there such thing as LC_GUI defined
> somewhere, or are you suggesting we introduce it?

There is no LC_GUI so far. I suggest that we introduce it: The orientation
of components in a GUI is so different from what the existing LC_* variables
denote. LC_CTYPE describes the encoding of strings. I agree that the two
will often be related, but I can also very well imagine users who want to
have a right-to-left GUI but English for all the rest.

> > <numbers><symbols>     LC_NUMERIC
> > <numbers><currencyFormats> LC_NUMERIC
>
> Shouldn't this be LC_MONETARY?

Yes, my mistake. <numbers><currencyFormats> should be LC_MONETARY.
<numbers><symbols> still is LC_NUMERIC.

> BTW, POSIX (at least what we have in glibc) it is not as clean as we
> wish it to be. <nativeZeroDigit> and some parts of <decimal> and <group>
> are defined in glibc's LC_CTYPE, for example.

For these cases we'll have to extends the glibc code.

> Also, some of stuff that is in supplemental data has some POSIX
> equivalent, like characters.xml going into LC_CTYPE (glib's "translit_*"
> files), and parts of supplementalData.xml (<currencyData>) going into
> LC_MONETARY.

Yes. It will need new APIs. For example, transliteration is available in
glibc only through iconv(); an explicit API should be added instead.

Is the supplemental data important, btw? I tend to concentrate on the "core"
part, until a first release.

Bruno