Sorry for the late reply. Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Juan Manuel Macías <maciasch...@posteo.net> writes: > >> [...] I am very interested in all possible improvements in babel so that >> it integrates as best as possible with automatically generated files. >> Among them are the possibility of using BCP47 codes or using a language >> (at least basically) without the need for a prior declaration. These are >> things already done, but there are others that can still be improved. > > Do I understand correctly that babel, in future, may be able to > auto-detect more languages without explicitly declaring them? Correct. Indeed, it is possible to use the command \foreignlanguage or its environment version (otherlanguage*) without having to declare the language previously. I would say that \foreignlanguage is a command that covers a high percentage of use cases in multilingual documents, since it is intended for short fragments of text and only loads the hyphen rules of the host language. >> [...] any suggestion for improvement is very welcome [...] > > This is a bit too out of context. Improvement of what? I think it is related to the previous paragraph: "I am very interested in all possible improvements in babel so that it integrates as best as possible with automatically generated files[...]" >> Among the things I agree on is name issue. I am unifying the dice in the >> CLDR as much as possible, and already, in fact, it is very advanced: >> >> https://latex3.github.io/babel/guides/locale-naming.html > > AFAIU, the relevant quote is > > They are taken from the CLDR. Wherever the CLDR doesn’t provide a name > (eg, “Medieval Latin”), the pattern followed in practice for other names > is applied, namely, use the ‘natural’ form in English: medievallatin. > They should be preferably based on the description field in the IANA > registry (eg, polytonicgreek), although some simplifications can be > necessary, because some names are “too” descriptive. See also the > templates for about 500 locales already available. As a secondary > source, Glottolog is used, too. (Wikipedia articles can be taken as a > complementary but unreliable source, and its information must be > verified; on the other hand, internal data, like this one, is useful for > both names and tags.) > > I am not very sure about "some simplifications" referring to IANA. I > guess it is referring to language names in > https://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry/language-subtag-registry > like "Puter idiom of Romansh". > > From Org perspective, verbosity is not a primary concern as long as we > provide #+language: completion support. Probably, we should favor names > that are more likely known (or can be easily found) by the language > users. IANA and https://glottolog.org/ look like good sources we can > link to. > > We can also provide multiple language name variants though I don't see a > need to bother unless we get user requests to do such thing. I agree. I even think it would be a good point to also include the vernacular name of each language. By the way, Javier has also told me that he is going to consider the 'onchar=ids fonts' issue related to the case of several languages that use the same script (already discussed here in past messages). Best regards, Juan Manuel -- Juan Manuel Macías https://juanmanuelmacias.com https://lunotipia.juanmanuelmacias.com https://gnutas.juanmanuelmacias.com