This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug localedata/10501] bn_IN collation does not have canonical equivalence definitions
- From: "sayamindu at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 17 Aug 2009 12:18:36 -0000
- Subject: [Bug localedata/10501] bn_IN collation does not have canonical equivalence definitions
- References: <20090809051246.10501.santhosh.thottingal@gmail.com>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From sayamindu at gmail dot com 2009-08-17 12:18 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Refer the collation rules of UCA -
> http://www.unicode.org/Public/UCA/latest/allkeys.txt
> [...]
> 09CB ; [.1B48.0020.0002.09CB] # BENGALI VOWEL SIGN O
> 09C7 09BE ; [.1B48.0020.0002.09CB] # BENGALI VOWEL SIGN O
> 09CC ; [.1B49.0020.0002.09CC] # BENGALI VOWEL SIGN AU
> 09C7 09D7 ; [.1B49.0020.0002.09CC] # BENGALI VOWEL SIGN AU
> [...]
>
> It is implemented in UCA and should be available in glibc localedata too. ie,
> Collation weights of canonically equivalent sequences should be explicitly
> defined in glibc and there should not be any assumption on the input to the
> collation.
>
I would tend to second Santhosh here, since we do not know where the data might
be coming from (eg: someone might try to assume a shortcut while implementing a
legacy encoding -> unicode converter, etc)
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10501
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.