Michał Górny schrieb:
On the other hand, there will be some cost:
- If BCP 47 tags containing a script or a variant should be used to
generate LINGUAS, they will require explicit mapping. (OTOH, such
mapping will also be needed if we stick to Gettext syntax but unify
variants like "sr@latin" and "sr@Latn".)
- Different syntax for LINGUAS and L10N might be confusing to users,
so additional documentation will be needed.
As pointed out below, users better not mess with LINGUAS anyway. But one
thing which might still cause confusion is that LANG and L10N use
different syntax if we decide for BCP 47.
Comments?
I'd say BCP-47.
+1 for BCP-47
The gettext tags aren't 100% defined anyway, so we'd end up having to choose
between one upstream and another eventually, and map to the other.
Worse, gettext locales, while apparently designed to resemble POSIX
locales, can change at any time without notice and may be different
between glibc versions.
Also, when it makes mapping L10N to LINGUAS harder, it will discourage people
from abusing the latter.
Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
