Subject: Re: (SC22.464) Response to comments from Mr. Alain LaBont<e'>

From: [email-masked] (Keld J|rn Simonsen)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 13:59:46 +0100

Willem Wakker writes:

> I hope that I do not fall in the same trap when I point out to those who
> are less familiar with the matter that (1) SC22/WG15 POSIX has never asked
> for the datatype to support their Locales, (2) during the last SC22 plenary
> the WG20 representative told me that the issue of the datatype was never
> discussed in WG20 and (3) all references to support the requested datatype
> (the Canadian Standard and the SHARE document) are based on work done by Alain.
> In other words: everything points back to Alain, and only to him.
> Does this make the requested datatype less needed? Maybe not. Maybe Alain is
> one of the very few people in this world with the right vision. But is is not
> the task of WG11 to validate this vision, without further support from other
> experts.

I believe I am the WG20 representative, Willem points to. May I point out that
the fact that WG20 has not discussed it, is due to the number of items
on the WG20 agenda, there is really a lot to do. This does not mean that
the Canadian LID proposal is not important, but many other things have been deemed
more important in WG20.

Keld