Re: [libreoffice-l10n] LibreOffice in Chinese (China)

2010.11.11 17:12, Aron Xu rašė:
> But keep in mind Hans and Hant cannot cover different kinds of
> Chinese, for example there are differences between HK and TW, but they
> are combined to one single Hant, which perhaps could not be accepted
> by people who are using them, :)

Of course. The question though is if there will ever be two different 
Simplified Chinese localizations of LO. Are those differences really 
noticable?

Quoting the Apple document I linked to before:
> The new standard defines new tags for the traditional Chinese (|Hant|) 
> and simplified Chinese (|Hans|) scripts. Thus, traditional Chinese 
> spoken in any country uses the code |zh-Hant|. Traditional Chinese, as 
> it is spoken in Taiwan, now uses the locale code |zh-Hant_TW|. 

IMHO, you can think of zh-Hans as zh@hans in glibc terms. Script is 
simply a different kind of locale modifier than country. Since glibc has 
four Chinese locales, they probably don't need the modifier. But if they 
needed it, the final locale codes would probably look like zh_CN@hans.

> >  From what I've read, it's going to be obsoleted in future versions of .Net.
> Yes, I've wrote that it is to be replaced, but remember Windows XP is
> still running on many people's desktops and laptops, I'm not sure this
> situation can change very rapidly in near future.

XP will be EOL'd in 2014 anyway. It won't stay for ever, after all...
Regardless of that, I think our goal is for LO to work as expected in 
your locale. If it does, I don't see the exact language code as a problem.

> And some other
> applications are still using zh-CHS as a tag on there release
> documents to tell people it is in Simplified Chinese, no matter
> whether they have to use zh-Hans in new .NET, they just show such
> information to end users and people get confused.

Hm, IMO, locale code is a technicality that the end users should not 
care about at all.

> Well, I don't mind BCP 47 if it works well, but I've mentioned before
> that it cannot cover all different variants, it's just a loosely
> defined standard. To be more precise to end users, we might have to
> place two sets of translations, zh_TW and zh_HK, into zh-Hant
> packages. They are not the same, so we need to do it separately, even
> if we make them into a single package to end users.

Not necessary, as stated above. zh_TW@hant and zh_HK@hant could be used, 
and then again specifying the country code would probably make the need 
for a script code obsolete...  Ha!:)


> Listing language variants with different regions is a good way to
> solve conflicts in our development. On the other hand, using a loosely
> defined name for our release language pack (which contains everything
> fit into the category) is probably good for users.

I think in the end it's about Chinese (Simplified) vs. Chinese (China). 
Until we don't have two country versions of Simplified  or Traditional, 
we can just skip country codes, I think.

Rimas

--
E-mail to l10n+help@libreoffice.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/l10n/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted