On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 08:48:58PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: [...] > > > So LSB is wrong. Q2.3 is crap. Reread my post. Rethink what is the > > > locale. The principle is the real world requirement, not the standard > > > conformance. Blind follower might not be always good result. Be not > > > the standard fundamentalism. > > > > I could understand your point of view if there was a conflict between > > standard conformance and real world requirement, but this is not the > > case. We ask you to allow people generating their own locales with > > pre-Euro currencies if they need to, nothing more; current locales > > are unchanged. > > Hmm. we can say int_curr_symbols have no ability to handle the > multiple/obsolete currencies. But should we provide (ex) "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? > Is it really needed?
No. > I don't think it's really needed. In addition, changing some fields > with the same locale should be avoided (so the separate locales > (de_DE, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) should be provided), because it becomes the > different locale each other. Please re-read original bugreport and #156821, we do not ask for any change, but additions to the list of valid currencies (or to be more precise cancels of removals in iso-4217.def), that's all. If user wants to define [EMAIL PROTECTED], this is his own problem; he currently can't because DEM is not a valid currency. Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
