Print

Print


Thank you, Charles.  Material to think about -- a standard basic or default 
can be achieved, but more is needed.  Somewhere to start from, but the path 
has to be created, the blind alleys identified, the objective elaborated and 
defined; and the framework builders need to bear it in mind that they may 
need to accommodate cues for more than a simple output to be collated!

Hal Cain, sometime sufferer from outputs not adequate for the objectives
Melbourne, Australia
[log in to unmask]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 20:56:47 +0000, Riley, Charles <[log in to unmask]> 
wrote:

>	One of the more helpful parts of this worth underlining here is 
probably this section, in my view:
>
>	"The feature of linguistic applicability deserves further 
discussion. DUCET does not and cannot actually provide linguistically 
correct sorting for every language without further tailoring. That would be 
impossible, due to conflicting requirements for ordering different languages 
that share the same script. It is not even possible in the specialized cases 
where a script may be predominantly used by a single language, because of 
the limitations of the DUCET table design and because of the requirement to 
minimize implementation overhead for all users of DUCET.
>
>	"Instead, the goal of DUCET is to provide a reasonable default 
ordering for all scripts that are not tailored. Any characters used in the 
language of primary interest for collation are expected to be tailored to 
meet all the appropriate linguistic requirements for that language. For 
example, for a user interested primarily in the Malayalam language, DUCET 
would be tailored to get all details correct for the expected Malayalam 
collation order, while leaving other characters (Greek, Cyrillic, Han, and 
so forth) in the default order, because the order of those other characters 
is not of primary concern. Conversely, a user interested primarily in the 
Greek language would use a Greek-specific tailoring, while leaving the 
Malayalam (and other) characters in their default order in the table."
>
>	
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum 
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Emerson
>Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 12:41 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Unicode collation for Bibframe (Re: Filing 
indicators)
>
>Riley, Charles writes:
>
>> There is something to work with here that I think would address that:
>> http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr10/
>
>UTS #10 tracks ISO 14651 the same way the Unicode Standard tracks ISO
>10646: while the descriptions differ, the two organizations strive to keep 
the data tables synchronised.
>
>    -tree
>
>--
>Tom Emerson
>Principal Software Engineer, Search
>EBSCO Publishing
>[log in to unmask]