On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 02:33:40AM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 01:36:14PM -0700, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > > > Indeed, I agree. But in my opinion there is no need for a UK at euro > > > locale. > > > For example, if country X has trade relations with India then should we > > > introduce a locale for this country with support for the Indian currency? > > > > > > In other words, this is a real problem that has to be resolved > > > accordingly. > > > > It's easiest to resolve by EOFing all non-Unicode locales. But that's > > not necessarily a practical solution. > > IMHO it would be very "unwise". Solaris would simply "disappear" from > markets where non-UTF-8 multibyte characters are either required by law > or still have widespread coporate use (e.g. "zh_CN.GB18030", "ja_JP.PCK" > and some others fall into this category (and Sun has invested a lot to > get these locales implemented&&certified)).
That's what I meant by "not...practical" :) Even the European non-Unicode locales could not easily be removed, even though the same political problems are not present there, simply because of the need to support lots of existing content in ISO-8859-*. Nico --
