Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, canmove, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
4,083
edits
L10n:Locale Codes: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
minor ISO/RFC link adjustments
(Add paragraph about dialect part of codes) |
m (minor ISO/RFC link adjustments) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We might want to support/allow generic 2/3-letter language names without | We might want to support/allow generic 2/3-letter language names without an [http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/02iso-3166-code-lists/list-en1.html ISO 3166] region identifier. | ||
For example, someone's working on Esperanto, which has no region. Or our current German builds are actually a generic German L10n, usable for all countries which use German, not just Germany (de-DE, aviary) or Austria (de-AT, SeaMonkey). I'm sure there are other examples. Does anything speak against allowing language names like "de", "eo" et al.? | For example, someone's working on Esperanto, which has no region. Or our current German builds are actually a generic German L10n, usable for all countries which use German, not just Germany (de-DE, aviary) or Austria (de-AT, SeaMonkey). I'm sure there are other examples. Does anything speak against allowing language names like "de", "eo" et al.? | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
After recent discussions, someone wanting to register for venetian, which has no ISO 639.2 code, and some of our people even reading the | After recent discussions, someone wanting to register for venetian, which has no [http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/ ISO 639.2] code, and some of our people even reading the "language tag" RFC 3066, it seems we want to support the third (dialect) part of locale codes as well. That's extremely useful for languages that have no ISO 639.2 code defined, as we can use a generic code (like e.g. roa) and add the [http://www.ethnologue.com/codes/default.asp SIL code] as the "dialect" identifier. This way, we stay inside standardized values and can nicely support those languages we had problems with in the old scheme. | ||