This is the mail archive of the
libc-locales@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GNU libc locales project.
Re: Incorrect sorting order?
- From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <keld at dkuug dot dk>
- To: libc-locales at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 17:29:58 +0200
- Subject: Re: Incorrect sorting order?
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:54:27PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> According to
> <URL:http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=259>, the
> glibc sorting order is different from the order used in Solaris and
> Tru64 Unix. Is the glibc sorting order according to the ISO 14651
> spesification? Is the spesification wrong? Anyone know?
I think this is cocrect. Or: I have seen some quite incorrect sorting
specs, including Danish, for Solaris. I think glibc is correct and that
Solaris is wrong.
14651 is mostly correct. I do have some issues with 14651, current
version, but I am not sure which version of 14651 that is the one used
in glibc.
Some of my issues are that in current 14651 an ø and an æ is not sorted
as an o and ae respectiviely, which is the cultural expectation for most
languages. They are sorted as separate letters - somewhere. Likewise for
a number of other latin letters, like Polish L with stroke.
I think solaris ordering is not built on ISO 10646 , but on individual
charsets such as iso-8859-1 - but it is a long time since I have seen
these specs (although my name may be in them:-)
best regards
keld