This is the mail archive of the libc-locales@sourceware.org mailing list for the GNU libc locales project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 21 Apr 2016 13:14, Egmont Koblinger wrote: > You're right: I cannot read the Unicode rule syntax format :) Its > compactness makes me worry whether it's able to express all the > subtleties that glibc's format can. > > Even if I could read this syntax, I wouldn't dare to review the > definitions themselves without being able to verify against the > unittests. > > Do you happen to have the link where the proposal for the new > definitions were made? I'd like to ask them to validate the rules > against my test file. it's not clear where that is coming from. i searched but couldn't find a ticket for it. > That being said, I hope fixing/verifying CLDR isn't a blocker for > applying the fix to glibc. no, we're not holding up collation changes at this time. we're moving in that direction though, so it'll need to be fixed in cldr eventually. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |