Hi list
Once again: I'm but a courier here. Please send your replies to Pablo
Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Please take a look at http://linuxi18n.org/locales/#he .
Tzafrir Cohen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 19:12:52 +0200
From: Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tzafrir Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: hebrew keymappings] (fwd)
Kaixo!
On Fri, Oct 08, 1999 at 02:04:37PM +0200, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Since you weren't in the CC
Ok, so here is my reply.
> From: "Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Linux IL Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: hebrew keymappings] (fwd)
> TC>> As newer versions of iso-639 define 'he', and as HTML 4.0 uses 'he',
>
> Well, W3C itself says "he" in one place and "iw" in another...
In the same 4.0 standard ?
Or could it be that 'iw' was told as recommended to recognize for
compatibility purposes ?
> standard was once to set names by *native* transcription. Thus "de" and
> not "ge", "iw" and not "he".
but 'ja', 'ko', 'cs',...
(and why 'iw' and not 'iv' ?)
The two letter code is just that, a two letter code.
What is important is to agree on one ad stick with it.
It seems that the current accepted language code for hebrew language is 'he';
so I think it is the one to use.
I don't know why nor when the change from 'iw' to 'he' has been done; but
I personally think there are more important things to do than to fight to have
the language code changed back again.
> TC>> as well as XFree86 and glibc include 'he' in their more recent versios;
>
> *That's* nice now. So everyone that happened to use that locale now find
> their systems to stop working. Really, really nice.
You can do a symlink from /usr/share/locale/he -> /usr/share/locale/iw
if needed; or define LANGUAGE=he:iw to see the catalog files in those
both directories.
XFree86 already point to the same files whether you use 'iw' or 'he'.
> About glibc - my version (2.1.1 from RH) still uses "iw",
both are provided; and they are the same file btw.
> and X locales don't mention it at all.
he_IL.ISO8859-8 is there from XFree86 3.3.3 at least (I jsut checked in the
sources)
> But if this changes, that's really good
> "surprise" and doesn't add to "product stability" of Linux at all.
Linux has absolutely nothing to do here !
The iso language code is not defined by "Linux", nor by XFree86, nor by GNU.
The language code either is defined by the ISO and other standardization
bodies; and then I think we should use it; either it doesn't yet and only in
that case may we define one.
I can change back to 'iw' for the things I'm in charge of, and patch XFree86,
and change the name used for glibc in Linux Mandrake...
but then what if the rest of the world uses 'he' ?
Is here any good reason to use 'iw' (other than just because you previously
did so and don't want to do the little needed change in some config file)
instead of 'he'; knowing that 'he' is what seems to be the preferred form
used by international standandardization bodies ?
If there is evidence than 'iw' is the preferred and widely used form I'll
use it; but until today all the evidences I've see npoint to the other way.
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken
> Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells
> phone +972-3-9316425 /\ JRRT LotR.
> http://sharat.co.il/frodo/ whois:!SM8333
--
Ki ça vos våye bén,
Pablo Saratxaga
http://www.ping.be/~pin19314/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0x8F0E4975
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
