On 19.06.2016 20:21, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On 19.06.2016 20:10, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 08:05:30PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: >>> On 19.06.2016 19:52, Andrey Chernov wrote: >>>> On 19.06.2016 19:47, Andrey Chernov wrote: >>>>> On 19.06.2016 18:49, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 04:52:34PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 07:57:49AM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: >>>>>>>> On 19.06.2016 6:44, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: >>>>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>>>> - Prefer to use %d over %e where the day of the month should be zero >>>>>>>>> filled. >>>>>>>>> - Since %e means the day of the month as well, regard %e as same as >>>>>>>>> %d >>>>>>>>> in md_order. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nonsense doubled formats in sr_*_RS locales and nonsense md_order >>>>>>>> there too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Crap I'll dig into it, thanks for spotting it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Bapt >>>>>> >>>>>> Should be fixed by: >>>>>> https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/locale-triple-components.diff >>>>>> >>>>>> The perl script generating the locales was badly handling locales with 3 >>>>>> components, fixed now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry about that >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Bapt >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> sr locales are badly named before anything else, proper format is >>>>> language[_COUNTRY][.encoding][@variant] >>>>> I.e. >>>>> sr_RS.UTF-8@Latn >>>>> sr_RS.ISO8859-2@Latn >>>>> sr_RS.ISO8859-t@Cyrl >>>>> >>>>> I don't know, if out utilities (f.e. locale(1)) can handle @variant >>>>> suffix. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> =sr_RS.ISO8859-5@Cyrl >>>> =our, and not utilities only but libc too >>> >>> Since right now we have only single @variant per each encoding, and no >>> @variant for other locales, we can just drop it and use right names like: >>> sr_RS.UTF-8 >> >> We have 2 for the above the Cyrl version and the Latn version >> >>> sr_RS.ISO8859-2 >>> sr_RS.ISO8859-5 >> >> We can make aliases easily for that is that is what people want, not the we >> have >> the same for other locales: >> >> zh_Hans_CN.GB18030 >> zh_Hans_CN.GB2312 >> zh_Hans_CN.GBK >> zh_Hans_CN.UTF-8 >> zh_Hans_CN.eucCN >> zh_Hant_HK.UTF-8 >> zh_Hant_TW.Big5 >> zh_Hant_TW.UTF-8 >> >> With some aliases for some of the previously existing ones: >> zh_TW.Big5 >> zh_TW.UTF-8 >> zh_CN.GB18030 >> zh_CN.GB2312 >> zh_CN.GBK >> zh_CN.UTF-8 >> zh_CN.eucCN >> zh_HK.UTF-8 >> >> Some of the new locales (that didn't exist before) I have only imported the >> new >> name format: >> kk_Cyrl_KZ.UTF-8 >> mn_Cyrl_MN.UTF-8 >> sr_Cyrl_RS.ISO8859-5 >> sr_Cyrl_RS.UTF-8 >> sr_Latn_RS.ISO8859-2 >> sr_Latn_RS.UTF-8 >> >> I would prefer staying on the new syntax given it is allowed by some RFC and >> it >> is slowly being adopted everywhere else. >> >> Btw another RFC: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5646.txt >> >> Best regards, >> Bapt >> > > Old POSIX don't use RFC 5646, there are ISO-639 two-letter codes. When > encodings are different, there is no needs to specify variants, they > have meaning only for the same encoding. > >
I found POSIX reference about @-syntax: [language[_territory][.codeset][@modifier]] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap08.html It says nothing about language, territory or codeset standards. They comes from another standard, ISO 15897: "8. Natural language, as specified in ISO 639 9. Territory, as two-letter form of ISO 3166" I can't find there something about codeset/charmap standartization, but perhaps I just overlook some reference.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature