[ "To:" is changed from current-users to tech-userlevel, because
  this is different issue.]

> + EN_LOCALE		= C
> + DE_LOCALE		= de_DE.ISO8859-1
> + FR_LOCALE		= fr_FR.ISO8859-1
> + JP_LOCALE		= ja
> + SJIS_LOCALE		= ja_JP.SJIS
> + KR_LOCALE		= ko_KR.EUC
> + CN_LOCALE		= zh
> + TW_LOCALE		= zh
> + I2_LOCALE		= i2

Is this official decision ?
If not, I think X11R6 locale name is better than rune-like locale name,
because
	- "EUC" is not codeset, but encoding scheme. (*1)
	- "zh" is not useful for distinguish Chinese and Taiwanese.
So, probably the following definitions are better.

> + EN_LOCALE		= C
> + DE_LOCALE		= de
> + FR_LOCALE		= fr
> + JP_LOCALE		= ja
> + SJIS_LOCALE		= ja_JP.SJIS
> + KR_LOCALE		= ko
> + CN_LOCALE		= zh
> + TW_LOCALE		= zh_TW

Or, if we use full locale name (like "language_territory.codeset"),
the followings may be better.

> + EN_LOCALE		= C
> + DE_LOCALE		= de_DE.ISO8859-1
> + FR_LOCALE		= fr_FR.ISO8859-1
> + JP_LOCALE		= ja_JP.eucJP
> + SJIS_LOCALE		= ja_JP.SJIS
> + KR_LOCALE		= ko_KR.eucKR
> + CN_LOCALE		= zh_CN.eucCN
> + TW_LOCALE		= zh_TW.eucTW

(*1)	But "eucCN", "eucTW" "eucJP", "eucKR" are codeset.
	And also, "ISO8859-1" is the one of the EUC (or ISO-2022) 
	based codeset.

Please look at X11R6 for detail.
--
soda@sra.co.jp		Software Research Associates, Inc., Japan
(Noriyuki Soda)		   software tools and technology group