I agree!  I find it hard to believe that case insensitivity isn't always
assumed.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:22 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: sort parameter
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > > From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > > I don't hesitate to say it. Ascending/descending has been
> cited as a
> > > requirement; the other two haven't.
> > OK, I hereby cite case-insensitivity as a requirement.  It's crucial
> > for sorting union catalogues where the original collections used
> > different case conventions.  If I look for Kernighan books
> in a ucat,
> > I want "Software Tools" sorted next to "SOFTWARE TOOLS".
>
> But is there a requirement for the /distinction/ or can we
> just say 'Sort
> should be treated as case insensitive' ?
>
> Rob
>
> --
>       ,'/:.          Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
>     ,'-/::::.        http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
>   ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
> ,'---/::::::::::.    Twin Cathedrals:  telnet:
> liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777
> ____/:::::::::::::.              WWW:
> http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/
> I L L U M I N A T I
>