Re: Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
Thanks for this further explanation.
Spanish example: el 5 de Mayo - in Dutch we say 5 mei.
Hannie
On 21-01-18 11:23, Rafal Luzynski wrote:
21.01.2018 08:58 Hannie Dumoleyn wrote:
Hello Rafal,
Although I do not see Dutch in your list, I was just curious what you
mean by genitive and nominative case when speaking of month names.
TL;DR: AFAIK Dutch language is not affected, nothing will be changed.
A longer explanation: sorry for this confusion, instead of "genitive"
and "nominative" I should use the long description: "the month name
in the grammatical form required when the month is used as part
of a complete date" and "the month name in the form required when
the month is named by itself". Some languages do not have declension
and no nominative and genitive case, some languages do have the
genitive case but do not use it when formatting a date, some languages
have very simple system and the genitive case is created by adding
a simple preposition ("de" in Spanish, is it "van" in Dutch?) or
a simple suffix ("ta" in Finnish), always looking the same. In those
languages the new feature is not needed.
could
you please give some examples?
Upper Sorbian: January - "januar", but January 21st - "21 januara"
Polish: "styczeń", but "21 stycznia"
Czech: "leden" but "21 ledna" (it must be verified if they really
need this)
Croatian: "siječanj" but "21 siječnja".
Catalan: "gener", but "21 de gener" - that looks easy but compare
with: April: "abril" but "21 d’abril" - impossible to handle with
the current system.
Finnish: "tammikuu" - but "21 tammikuuta" (always "ta" appended,
this system is easy and they don't need this new feature).
I have forwarded this email to ubuntu-translators.
Thank you, I have never been involved in Ubuntu so didn't think
about it. This can be very helpful.
Regards,
Rafal
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:54:52PM +0100, Petr Kovar wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 00:10:28 +0100 (CET)
> Rafal Luzynski wrote:
> >
> > In case of Czech, Serbian and (probably) Slovak the case is controversial.
> > As far as I was told, in those languages the nominative case is used
> > normally in dates unless whole date is in a genitive case. However,
>
> Not sure who provided you with this information, but for Czech, this is not
> quite true. While using nominative for %B is not exactly incorrect (so the
> current implementation can be seen as acceptable), being able to use
> genitive for %B would allow us to provide a translation that sounds more
> natural.
>
That's right.
> However, changing anything in glibc is very tricky so I won't vote
> for this change without hearing what other Czech translators think. I
> think other language groups might share the same sentiment, actually.
>
It's not tricky. It's incompatible. "%B" means a month name in a dictionary
form (i.e. nominativ in case of flective languages) now. Existing translations
of other programs expect it and changing in into a different form would break
them.
I'm unable to decide if the change is overall positive of negative. But
if it happens, it needs proper documentation in nl_langinfo(3), strftime(3)
etc. E.g. nl_langinfo(3) reads:
MON_{1–12} (LC_TIME)Return name of the n-th month.
With the proposed change it would return the non-dictionary form that cannot
be used a standalone label and that's wrong. Try running "cal" command.
Also MON and ALT_MON difference should not be explained with cases. Cases are
a language specific matter. It should talk about "a dictionary form" and "a
form used in a date string".
Actually the more I think about it the less I like the change. How do you want
to solve the breakage of nl_langinfo(3) that's defined by POSIX? I'd rather
reverse the change. Keep MON for the dictionary form and use ALT_MON for the
date form and either change strftime's "%x" and "%c" definitions to use
ALT_MON instead or keep the decision up to translators of the glibc.
-- Petr
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
> Dnia 22 styczeń 2018 o 09:16 Petr Pisar napisał(a):
BTW, this ^^^ is incorrect in Polish but it only illustrates how common
this bug is.
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:54:52PM +0100, Petr Kovar wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 00:10:28 +0100 (CET)
> > Rafal Luzynski wrote:
> > >
> > > In case of Czech, Serbian and (probably) Slovak the case is controversial.
> > > As far as I was told, in those languages the nominative case is used
> > > normally in dates unless whole date is in a genitive case. However,
> >
> > Not sure who provided you with this information, but for Czech, this is not
> > quite true. While using nominative for %B is not exactly incorrect (so the
> > current implementation can be seen as acceptable), being able to use
> > genitive for %B would allow us to provide a translation that sounds more
> > natural.
> >
> That's right.
I heard it from 2 different Czech people. But I will not be surprised if
that's wrong, lots of Polish native speakers do the same mistake.
>
> > However, changing anything in glibc is very tricky so I won't vote
> > for this change without hearing what other Czech translators think. I
> > think other language groups might share the same sentiment, actually.
> >
> It's not tricky. It's incompatible. "%B" means a month name in a dictionary
> form (i.e. nominativ in case of flective languages) now. Existing translations
> of other programs expect it and changing in into a different form would break
> them.
So, what format specifier do you use when you actually want to format
a date? This is a rhetoric question, of course the answer is that such
a format specifier does not exist. But it has been decided to be changed.
From now "%B" will return the form which is used when formatting a full
date.
> I'm unable to decide if the change is overall positive of negative. But
> if it happens, it needs proper documentation in nl_langinfo(3), strftime(3)
> etc. E.g. nl_langinfo(3) reads:
>
> MON_{1–12} (LC_TIME) Return name of the n-th month.
If you mean the man pages then indeed, man pages are not part of glibc
project and they need to be changed separately. I'm going to file a bug
report against man today. On the other hand, the info pages are part of
glibc and they will be changed along. BTW, note that no current documentation
says that this month name must be in a nominative (dictionary, standalone)
form.
> With the proposed change it would return the non-dictionary form that cannot
> be used a standalone label and that's wrong. Try running "cal" command.
True, there are some applications which will have to be changed.
cal is on my radar and I'm going to file a pull request today.
Other applications which need change are GNOME Calendar and GNOME Shell
(which also contains a calendar). Minor changes will be required in
date(1) command line utility but this is more tricky. At the moment
I am not aware of other applications, are you?
> Also MON and ALT_MON difference should not be explained with cases. Cases are
> a language specific matter. It should talk about "a dictionary form" and "a
> form used in a date string".
True, it will be described as "the grammatical form required when the month
is used as part of a complete date" vs. "the form required when the month
is named by itself".
> Actually the more I think about it the less I like the change. How do you want
> to solve the breakage of nl_langinfo(3) that's defined by POSIX? I'd rather
> reverse the change. Keep MON for the dictionary form and use ALT_MON for the
> date form and either change strftime's "%x" and "%c" definitions to use
> ALT_MON instead or keep the decision up to translators of the glibc.
These are more development issues rather than translation issues.
They have been discussed for a long time on libc-alpha list. [1] I know that
not everybody participated in those discussions, obviously this is impossible.
Regarding your question, the number of the applications which will need
to be changed is low, definitely much lower than the number of applications
which would need a change in the reverse solution. Also the reverse solution
would be incompatible with what BSD family has been using for about 20 years
now [2] and what POSIX has accepted [2] about 7 years ago (but has not yet
published). However, this may not be true for Czech language so I'm asking
every translators community for a permission before I push the locale data
changes for their languages.
Regards,
Rafal
[1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/
[2] https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=strftime&sektion=3
[3] http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=258
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
22.01.2018 11:53 k...@keldix.com wrote: > [...] > Yes, I think this change is not clean design. We should keep the meaning of > mon > to be the nominative name of the month. > Otherwise it would break cal and other programs > Making a new notion for what we need here like genitive form, would be a > cleaner design. > > When we make the change, and we apply it in a locale, we can then both change > the > date format and the info for the genitive form. As this can happen > simultaneously, > there is no need for backwards compatibility for the date format. And we would have to make the same change in dozens of other applications as well. This has been discussed and decided at developers' level already. Indeed, it will break cal and few other applications but at the same time automagically will fix lots of other applications. > The idea of CLDR to use %Om for uppercased first letter is to me another > case of bad design. How can an application know that for languages using > genitinve > names this would apply and it would be good to have for all other languages > the month > name spelled with an initial upper case? Of course it will depend on the language (actually: the locale data) whether and how it will work. > And why should languages with genitive month > names not have the possibility to have an initial upper case? True, I'd like the same for the inflected languages as well. I don't read this as "other languages should use it for lower/uppercase month names" but "other languages can use it, if they want". Otherwise we have to say that this change has no use for other languages (which is not bad, OTOH). > In my mind it would be better to have a special formatting letter to say that > the initial letter should be upper case, and that would then also apply > to abbereviations and day names. I definitely agree and this is on my radar. Any idea of such a format specifier? > POSIX has recently also adressed the problem end made new provisions, > I think we should look carefully into this. Has this been done? Could you please provide a link to these new provisions in POSIX? I'm not aware of them. Regards, Rafal ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:16:23AM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:54:52PM +0100, Petr Kovar wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 00:10:28 +0100 (CET)
> > Rafal Luzynski wrote:
> > >
> > However, changing anything in glibc is very tricky so I won't vote
> > for this change without hearing what other Czech translators think. I
> > think other language groups might share the same sentiment, actually.
> >
> It's not tricky. It's incompatible. "%B" means a month name in a dictionary
> form (i.e. nominativ in case of flective languages) now. Existing translations
> of other programs expect it and changing in into a different form would break
> them.
>
> I'm unable to decide if the change is overall positive of negative. But
> if it happens, it needs proper documentation in nl_langinfo(3), strftime(3)
> etc. E.g. nl_langinfo(3) reads:
>
> MON_{1???12} (LC_TIME)Return name of the n-th month.
>
> With the proposed change it would return the non-dictionary form that cannot
> be used a standalone label and that's wrong. Try running "cal" command.
>
> Also MON and ALT_MON difference should not be explained with cases. Cases are
> a language specific matter. It should talk about "a dictionary form" and "a
> form used in a date string".
>
> Actually the more I think about it the less I like the change. How do you want
> to solve the breakage of nl_langinfo(3) that's defined by POSIX? I'd rather
> reverse the change. Keep MON for the dictionary form and use ALT_MON for the
> date form and either change strftime's "%x" and "%c" definitions to use
> ALT_MON instead or keep the decision up to translators of the glibc.
Yes, I think this change is not clean design. We should keep the meaning of mon
to be the nominative name of the month.
Otherwise it would break cal and other programs
Making a new notion for what we need here like genitive form, would be a
cleaner design.
When we make the change, and we apply it in a locale, we can then both change
the
date format and the info for the genitive form. As this can happen
simultaneously,
there is no need for backwards compatibility for the date format.
The idea of CLDR to use %Om for uppercased first letter is to me another
case of bad design. How can an application know that for languages using
genitinve
names this would apply and it would be good to have for all other languages the
month
name spelled with an initial upper case? And why should languages with genitive
month
names not have the possibility to have an initial upper case?
In my mind it would be better to have a special formatting letter to say that
the initial letter should be upper case, and that would then also apply
to abbereviations and day names.
POSIX has recently also adressed the problem end made new provisions,
I think we should look carefully into this. Has this been done?
Best regards
Keld
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
For Serbian (as well as for Bosnian, Montenegrian, Croatian) it would be for the best to keep %B as nominative and add %OB for genitive, since we would require nominative in great majority of cases and would make the transition towards the genitive less complicated and more smooth. Serbian example: January — januar January 21st — 21. januar Today is 21st January — Danas je 21. januar Appointment on January 21st — Sastanak 21. januara Visit your granny on January 21st — Poseti baku 21. januara Also, not sure if you should capitalise month names in Bosnian. All this languages are basically the same with some minor differences. ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 01:37:39PM +0100, ?? ?? wrote: > > Also, not sure if you should capitalise month names in Bosnian. All this > languages are basically the same with some minor differences. Capitalisation is mosly a feature needed when month and day names are in the beginning of a sentence. Best regards Keld ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: kk@latin coordinator
Le 21. 01. 18 à 09:11, Baurzhan Muftakhidinov a écrit : Hi, Just noticed there is kk@latin language created. What is the current process to request a coordinatorship on a team? I am the current coordinator for kk, I suppose I will need to take care of kk@latin too, when the final latin script for Kazakh language establishes. I just attributed kk@latin to the Kazakh team. https://l10n.gnome.org/teams/kk/ Claude -- www.2xlibre.net ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Help with the content rating strings in GNOME Software
Hi all, A few people have asked me to "fix" various source strings in https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-software/tree/src/gs-content-rating.c#n70 -- i.e. the content rating descriptions for OARS. Rather than playing whack-a-mole with the strings, I wondered if anyone with a grasp of English prose better than mine could review/fix them all? I'm happy to explain any of them that are confusing. Thanks. Richard ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
22.01.2018 13:37 Милош Поповић wrote: > > > For Serbian (as well as for Bosnian, Montenegrian, Croatian) it would be for > the > best to keep %B as nominative and add %OB for genitive, since we would require > nominative in great majority of cases and would make the transition towards > the > genitive less complicated and more smooth. Swapping the meaning of %B and %OB is impossible because it would also require swapping the meaning of MON_* and ALTMON_* in nl_langinfo(). Regarding the Croatian language, I'm not really sure. Please see: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._leden https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._januar https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._%D1%98%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%83%D0%B0%D1%80 (22. јануар = 22. januar) https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._janu%C3%A1r (22. január) So far so good, all nominative cases. But: https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._sije%C4%8Dnja (22. siječnja) Therefore I'd rather to hear from the proper translators for each language individually. > Serbian example: > January — januar > January 21st — 21. januar > Today is 21st January — Danas je 21. januar > Appointment on January 21st — Sastanak 21. januara > Visit your granny on January 21st — Poseti baku 21. januara This is understandable for me. The new specification says that %B is "the grammatical form required when the month is used as part of a complete date" and %OB is "the form required when the month is named by itself". It does not have to be genitive and nominative case, respectively. If in Serbian it is always the nominative case then let it remain as it is now. It's not obligatory to introduce the genitive case, it makes sense only if it is helpful for the language community and only if you find the current (old) implementation incorrect. That's why I'm asking first. Regards, Rafal ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
Re: [l10n-cs] Date Format with month names in genitive case - your opinions?
It would be great to get the opinion from the entire language community, although I didn’t get any reply from others for Serbian. Personally I think we will benefit from this change, but it will initially make a huge mess. У пон, 22. 01 2018. у 22:44 +0100, Rafal Luzynski пише: > 22.01.2018 13:37 Милош Поповић wrote: > > > > > > For Serbian (as well as for Bosnian, Montenegrian, Croatian) it would be for > > the > > best to keep %B as nominative and add %OB for genitive, since we would > > require > > nominative in great majority of cases and would make the transition towards > > the > > genitive less complicated and more smooth. > > Swapping the meaning of %B and %OB is impossible because it would > also require swapping the meaning of MON_* and ALTMON_* in nl_langinfo(). > > Regarding the Croatian language, I'm not really sure. Please see: > > https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._leden > https://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._januar > https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._%D1%98%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%83%D0%B0%D1%80 (22. > јануар = 22. januar) > https://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._janu%C3%A1r (22. január) > > So far so good, all nominative cases. But: > > https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/22._sije%C4%8Dnja (22. siječnja) > > Therefore I'd rather to hear from the proper translators for > each language individually. > > > Serbian example: > > January — januar > > January 21st — 21. januar > > Today is 21st January — Danas je 21. januar > > Appointment on January 21st — Sastanak 21. januara > > Visit your granny on January 21st — Poseti baku 21. januara > > This is understandable for me. The new specification says that > %B is "the grammatical form required when the month is used as > part of a complete date" and %OB is "the form required when the > month is named by itself". It does not have to be genitive and > nominative case, respectively. If in Serbian it is always the > nominative case then let it remain as it is now. It's not obligatory > to introduce the genitive case, it makes sense only if it is helpful > for the language community and only if you find the current (old) > implementation incorrect. That's why I'm asking first. > > Regards, > > Rafal ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i18n@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
