From: Karl Ove Hufthammer (karl@huftis.org)
Date: Sat Oct 12 2002 - 12:36:02 EDT
Jordi Mas <jmas@softcatala.org> wrote in
news:3DA7F8A4.90407@softcatala.org:
> For languages that really do not have cultural conventions is
> better not to specify any. If you think that 'Rennaiscance
> Latin' should not have a country attached (that I agree) we
> should change the locale.
You mean 'language (code)', not 'locale', right?
> However, you should take into account that people that already
> has document marked as la-IT will not be recognised as it if
> we change the locale,
Again, you mean language, right? There should be no problem
recognizing it. All 'languagecode-contrycode' documents are
'languagecode' documents. For example all 'en-US' (US English)
documents are 'en' (English) documents. The reverse is not true,
though.
If you change the languages codes (which I think should be done),
at least 'nn-NO', 'nb-NO', and 'da-DK' should be changed. 'se' is
used in both Sweden and Finland, but I'm pretty sure they use a
common orthography, so 'sv-SE' can also be changed (to 'sv').
> I COMPLETELY agree that we should move from the current two
> letter language into a better system. For example, we
> currently cannot 'support' (put Alan's right word here :) )
> Asturian (bable) because it does not has a two letter code,
> and many other examples that you point out in your bug report.
RFC 3066 <URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt > is what other
newer standards (such as XML) use, and solves this problem. It
basically says:
1. Use ISO 639-1 language code if possible
2. If not, use 639-2/T (not ISO 639-2/B!) language code
3. Use ISO 3166-1 country code if necessary
Se we get:
nn (Norwegian Nynorsk)
ast (Asturian)
en-GB (UK English)
-- Karl Ove Hufthammer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 12 2002 - 12:43:16 EDT