Re: Registration of new charset GB18030 (fwd)

[Anthony Fok <anthony@thizlinux.com>]

Hello Harald,

> First, I think the li18nux.org people have made a stupid decision.
> They should not be redefining charset names, but using someone else's - if 
> that someone is the IETF, they should allow all legal IETF charset names.
> If you can tell me who to say that to, I'll be happy to send them a note 
> saying so.

BTW, fortunately, they do allow legal IETF charset names too, and glibc etc.
follow IETF charset names quite closely.  What Li18nux requires is for
Li18nux-compliant systems to support Li18nux's own locale names in addition
to existing locale names.  Hmm...

> Second, there is no reason to change GBK based on this document; GBK is a 
> perfectly good STRING1, and STRING2 is optional.

I suppose they wanted to be consistent: GB-2312, GB-K and GB-18030.

But yes, point taken.  Thanks for your response!

Personally, I am not terribly fond of the Li18nux locale name guide either,
and I somewhat shudders at things like GB-K and HKSCS-BIG5 (well, at least
that is better than TCA-BIG5-HKSCS).  Nevertheless, I guess the Li18nux
committee have their reasons.

But yes, if you think there is no need to add these aliases to the IETF
Charset registry, that's perfectly fine with me too.  :-)

Thanks!

Anthony

-- 
Anthony Fok Tung-Ling
ThizLinux Laboratory   <anthony@thizlinux.com> http://www.thizlinux.com/
Debian Chinese Project <foka@debian.org>       http://www.debian.org/intl/zh/
Come visit Our Lady of Victory Camp!           http://www.olvc.ab.ca/