Re: localization

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp> Wed, 07 February 1996 03:57 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03714; 6 Feb 96 22:57 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03710; 6 Feb 96 22:57 EST
Received: from services.Bunyip.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19065; 6 Feb 96 22:57 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id WAA17573 for uri-out; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:42:08 -0500
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA17547 for <uri@services.bunyip.com>; Tue, 6 Feb 1996 22:42:01 -0500
Received: from necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA06716 (mail destined for uri@services.bunyip.com); Tue, 6 Feb 96 22:41:52 -0500
Received: by necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (8.6.11/necom-mx-rg); Wed, 7 Feb 1996 12:32:22 +0900
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Message-Id: <199602070332.MAA18697@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: localization
To: Hamilton Dennis <Dennis_Hamilton@pa.xerox.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 12:32:21 JST
Cc: uri@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To: <"<FB5F173181CF617C>FB5F173181CF617C@X-PA-PAHV-XS-MS1.xerox"@-SMF->; from "Hamilton,Dennis" at Feb 6, 96 6:40 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
X-Orig-Sender: owner-uri@bunyip.com
Precedence: bulk

> In an earlier exchange on the the URI distribution list, you made the 
>  comment "that's why localization doesn't work" or something like that.
> 
> I thought that was interesting.
> 
> On reflection, I'm not clear what you saw.
> 
> Are you saying that there is an inherent defect in localization?

In this case, yes.

>  Do 
>  you mean in principle or in a particular way of doing it?
> I want to understand this better.

Sometimes, like with full ISO 2022, multiple localizations can be
freely mixed, in which case, localization can be a step toward
internationalization.

But, having mutually exclusive localizations and switch between them
is just a pain, which is why EUC nor UNICODE is not internationalization.

As for URLs, localized people can not be compatible with
localized URLs unless they share the same locale.

						Masataka Ohta