On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 10:51 +0100, Andras Timar wrote:
Hi,
Do you know why 'be-BY' code was used in LibreOffice instead of
simpler form 'be' (Belarusian)?
We should follow the bcp47 guidelines as much as possible IMO, which
boils down to keep them as short as possible, and only as long as
necessary. So yeah, "be" would be good, sa-IN is another one that
dubiously over-specified IMO. I don't thing there was a good reason for
be-BY vs be.
Do you know why 'ns' was used instead of the standard (ISO 639-2)
'nso' for Northern Sotho?
I believe that the tooling at some stage somewhere wasn't able to deal
with > 2 letter codes. But it definitely is by now
If I replace them, i.e. be-BY -> be and ns -> nso, can it break anything?
In i18npool/source/iso/isolang.cxx we have sufficient magic to fix up
e.g. documents which had "ns-ZA" tags in them, so that's ok anyway.
You'll have to fix the helpcontent2/source/auxilliary/ns/*.cfg as well,
the
l10ntools/java/l10nconv/java/com/sun/star/tooling/languageResolver/lang.map as well I suppose and
solenv/inc/postset.mk
I'm not sure where, if there is/was a place, the truncation from nso to
ns took place in the past to select the "ns" translations when the
system locale was nso_ZA. Should be fairly easy to at least test that.
C.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.