From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 23 00:20:58 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A4601065670 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:20:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas@goodking.ca) Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com (yw-out-2324.google.com [74.125.46.28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070E48FC08 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:20:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas@goodking.ca) Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 9so1600954ywe.13 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.34.16 with SMTP id h16mr9076813anh.48.1245714516363; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:48:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from goodking.goodking.ca (dynamic-216-211-59-31.tbaytel.net [216.211.59.31]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 27sm12288244yxe.71.2009.06.22.16.48.34 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Thomas Abthorpe From: Thomas Abthorpe Organization: FreeBSD.GoodKing.Ca To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:48:30 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: <200906181114.43935.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <4A3B3524.7090606@FreeBSD.org> <200906191020.25037.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200906191020.25037.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> X-Face: /|[9,PbEOB6g>?2^*Sc|"~6:Ro"O>Nv\Rfkv\42g)=?utf-8?q?TuAYG=26+bD=5CpCJTX31s=5Fp=7Bc7=5D5a=2ED=2E=0A=09Y?=@QddKu_I[XB8; euK=^[=L1I#]rgi[0jgz^4qCTwlj]3kJ)]vc}O"HrA14hN)=?utf-8?q?aXewJPTi=7C=0A=09Pt=7BS3=23Vw4x-?="/:& Cc: Doug Barton Subject: Re: [RFC] New category proposal, i18n X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:20:58 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On June 19, 2009 10:20:18 am Thomas Abthorpe wrote: > It was my original thought to use localization as the category nane (and > certainly something I would still hear arguments for), localization *is* > l10n. While simply using internationalization seems misleading, the use of > i18n carries a more direct conveyance. > > I posted an email to freebsd-i18n@ yesterday after posted this original > message. I asked interested parties to weigh in on the matter. This thread seems to have gone cold, so I am trying to breath a little more life into it. I have received a lot of positive feedback off line. I found this great article at the W3.org website, http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-i18n To paraphrase a couple of key points "Localization refers to the adaptation of a product, application or document content to meet the language, cultural and other requirements of a specific target market (a "locale")." ... "Internationalization is the design and development of a product, application or document content that enables easy localization for target audiences that vary in culture, region, or language." To have localization, you need internationalization, so from this, I stand by my original proposal of i18n. Thomas - -- Thomas Abthorpe | FreeBSD Committer tabthorpe@FreeBSD.org | http://people.freebsd.org/~tabthorpe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkpAGE8ACgkQ5Gm/jNBp8qCXcgCfTxGr2dCRez6kIUO7E/qW6Eh2 z4sAni0skY5TK/DUnTkP4PCtmRJUr303 =MA7+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----