> From: Alex Shinn <xxxxxx@synthcode.com>
    > At 22 Jan 2004 18:09:55 -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

    > > The latter is done by doing both of the following:
    > >   a) Case mapping is a function on strings, not characters, and which
    > >      can change length, and
    > >   b) Case mapping is locale dependent, so at least some extra "locale"
    > >      object needs to be passed to the functions.  I would envision
    > >      this being analogous to the existing "environments" for the
    > >      specification of eval.

    > And/or use an implicit (current-locale) as in my response on c.l.s. (I'm
    > responding there on the general R6RS issues, not commenting on the C
    > FFI).

You have a choice.

1) Standard Scheme becomes case-sensitive.  May as well drop the case
   mappings from the standard entirely, in this case.

2) Standard Scheme specifies a deterministic case mapping for the
   portable character set in which portable programs may be written.

3) Standard Scheme does not provide for portable Scheme source texts.

I pick (2) because, after all, it would be naive to think that the
standard procedures for casemapping are linguistically sensitive in
the first place.   My second choice would be (1) but it would be a
sufficiently incompatible change that I don't take it seriously.   (3)
-- which seems to be what you are advocating -- is something I
consider completely unacceptable: I'd rather be able to annoy my Turk
friends with source texts that work but look slightly ugly than to not
be able to share source texts with them at all.

-t