Arnt Gulbrandsen writes:
Mark Davis writes:
...
At a quick glance, it appears that a number of comments have been
incorporated.
It is possible that some of my changes don't satisfy you. I had
conflicting requests for many things. Feel free to repeat, rephrase
or add arguments.
In -10 (which I'll send off once I finish work this evening) I've made
another few changes.
> 2.4 Sort Keys
The use of the term "collation canonicalization" to refer to sort
keys is very misleading. ...
Changed; the text now speaks of sort keys. I'm afraid there still are
instances of the old term around, I found one today.
In -10, all should be dead.
The term 'error' is also problematic, since what is really at issue
is a question of domain. For all those strings in the domain,
either 'equal' or 'not_equal' should be returned from the equality
function. For any string not in the domain, 'undefined' should be
returned.
Not changed. Back in February, I agreed that "error" was not ideal,
but did not see "undefined" as better, and could not find a really
apt term. The collations were a little too well-defined in the
"undefined" cases then.
However, in -10, I think they really will be undefined outside their
domain, so I'll change to using "undefined" instead of "error". (I'm
removing the bits that fall back to i;octet.)
Changed. The fallback to i;octet is now in the server, if the protocol
requires it.
This means that if a server can escape implementing i;octet, it can keep
all its strings in UCS-2 or UCS-4 internally, even as it implements
collations which are defined in terms of octets.
Arnt