Hi Erdal,
Today at 0:26, Erdal Ronahi wrote:
>> > Just for the reason that everybody's personal opinion is going to
>> > differ, I strongly believe we should trust such decision making to
>> > international standards organisation such as ISO, Unicode, IETF, etc.
>> > (IETF is managing language-tags scheme; does anyone know what they
>> > recommend for this variant in their RFC?)
>
> According to http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt it should be
> "ku-Arab-IQ" or optionally "ku-Arab-IQ-xxxx" with xxxx=Sorani or
> whatever.
>
> However, Launchpad does not use anything like this yet.
Nor are the GNU (or Unix) systems. IETF "language-tags" spec defines
the language markers which are used on the web, which is not at all
related to POSIX locales (to easily see that it's unrelated, just
compare the hyphen/underscore used: en_US vs en-US; also compare
az_AZ@latin vs az-Latn-AZ; and look into how I tried to push
sr_CS@Latn into GNU libc and failed because of the 'Latn' modifier :).
So, whatever I was recommending, it was not because I personally
prefer it that way, but because it would be easier for you to merge it
upstream.
Cheers,
Danilo
|
