This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Why <U0025> instead of % in locales?
- From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere at hungry dot com>
- To: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 04 Apr 2003 00:03:47 +0200
- Subject: Re: Why <U0025> instead of % in locales?
- References: <E1913pq-0002tR-00@saruman.uio.no> <3E8C715E.70003@redhat.com>
- Reply-by: Tue, 1 Jan 1801 04:37:40 +1000
[Ulrich Drepper]
> The <U....> notation is used for portability and charset
> independence. It's used everywhere and that has to remain this way.
Well, it is a fact that it isn't used everywhere. See for example at
the end of hy_AM, where I find the following lines:
lang_ab "hy"
lang_term "hye"
lang_lib "arm"
It seem to work. Why can't ASCII characters be used there. '<U0061>'
is written in ASCII, so the files is already expected to be in ASCII.
Why not accept 'a' as well as '<U0061>'? What breaks if I use 'a' in
the locale data field?
> You can write text normally and then run a simple shell script to
> convert them to the correct notation.
Is there some script to convert the other way as well, into something
readable? UTF-8 would be nice.