2010.11.11 17:35, Rimas Kudelis rašė:
2010.11.11 17:12, Aron Xu rašė: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.
Interestingly enough, relevant locales I see in Pootle are: zh_CN, zh_HK, zh_TW.
Which I guess means that these are the codes that will be used at least for 3.3. ;)
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