| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net |
| Cc: | barry(at)xythos(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_client_encoding |
| Date: | 2001-10-14 02:13:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20011014111345H.t-ishii@sra.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > ASCII SQL_ASCII
> > UTF-8 UNICODE UTF_8
> > MULE-INTERNAL MULE_INTERNAL
> > ISO-8859-1 LATIN1 ISO_8859_1
> > ISO-8859-2 LATIN2 ISO_8859_2
> > ISO-8859-3 LATIN3 ISO_8859_3
> > ISO-8859-4 LATIN4 ISO_8859_4
> > ISO-8859-5 ISO_8859_5
> > ISO-8859-6 ISO_8859_6
> > ISO-8859-7 ISO_8859_7
> > ISO-8859-8 ISO_8859_8
> > ISO-8859-9 LATIN5 ISO_8859_9
> > ISO-8859-10 ISO_8859_10 LATIN6
> > ISO-8859-13 ISO_8859_13 LATIN7
> > ISO-8859-14 ISO_8859_14 LATIN8
> > ISO-8859-15 ISO_8859_15 LATIN9
> > ISO-8859-16 ISO_8859_16
>
> Why aren't you using LATINx for (some of) these as well?
If LATIN6 to 9 are well defined in the SQL or some other standards, I
would not object using them. I just don't have enough confidence.
For ISO-8859-5 to 8, and 16, I don't see well defined standards.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bill Studenmund | 2001-10-14 11:42:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Package support for Postgres |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-10-13 23:39:11 | Re: Recursive SQL functions |