> -----Original Message-----
> From: Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim Starkey
> Sent: 3. maj 2005 23:43
> To: Firebird-Architect@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-Architect] Unicode collations and
> indices WAS: UTF-8 over UTF-16
>
> Svend Meyland Nicolaisen wrote:
>
> >If your native character set is based on Unicode then I
> would find it
> >strange not to use a compliant Unicode collation that takes all the
> >necessary code points into account. Why use Unicode and not
> be truely
> >Unicode compliant?
> >
> >
> >
> I have no interest in character set politics, but I rather be
> compliant with what the people who use an application think
> is appropriate than what the Unicode Association thought was
> good for them. If somebody tells me what collation they
> want, that's about the end of it.
>

The standards that Unicode set are not about what is good for them but
rather about what is good for the end users. The objectives for the
collations that Unicode specify are to comply with the cultures and in many
cases the laws of each locale in the world. I am not associated with Unicode
Association in any way but I think they are doing a pretty good job which is
in the interest for most of us.

Why make ad hoc special solutions for each user with a specific subset of
needs if it is possible to implement something that would fit the needs of
most users in the world? In my opinion what we need to discuss here is
whether it is technically feasible to do just this.


/Svend