This is the mail archive of the
libc-locales@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GNU libc locales project.
Re: Incorrect sorting order?
- From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <keld at dkuug dot dk>
- To: Keld Jørn Simonsen <keld at dkuug dot dk>
- Cc: libc-locales at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:21:02 +0200
- Subject: Re: Incorrect sorting order?
- References: <20040714152958.GA28919@rap.rap.dk>
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 05:29:58PM +0200, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:54:27PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >
> > According to
> > <URL:http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=259>, the
> > glibc sorting order is different from the order used in Solaris and
> > Tru64 Unix. Is the glibc sorting order according to the ISO 14651
> > spesification? Is the spesification wrong? Anyone know?
The problem is that the example actually has two fields, the surname and
the given name, and requires a multifield sort. This is acknowledged by
string sorting litterature. But the example only sorts on one field.
String sorting theory prescribes that special characters such as comma are ignored at
the first 3 levels. This is done in 14651. One exception for special
characters is the SPACE character which in word-by-word sorting is giving
a weight on level one. This could be changed for the specification in glibc.
Best regards
Keld