Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 15:32:05 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com Cc: motoyuki@snipe.rim.or.jp, nclayton@lehman.com, kuriyama@sky.rim.or.jp, doc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-translate@ngo.org.uk, jdp@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-tech-jp@jp.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Resolution: FDP reorganisation Message-ID: <199906252232.PAA04362@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <67622.930333696@zippy.cdrom.com> (jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) References: <67622.930333696@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> * * > OK, I'll explain more. * > * > A. Why 'ja' is better than 'ja.*' * * OK, so the Japanese folks have some sort of auto-conversion. That * takes care of strictly the Japanese language, but what about the * Chinese folks or the others that Nik pointed out? It seemed to me * that he was looking for a much wider convention here, not just a * solution to the ja problem. As I said before, some languages are different from others and trying to apply a single hammer on them all is not suitable. If you are optimizing for one language while pessimizing for another, what is the point in the unified convention? That said, *if* we need them all to look uniform, I propose we use <lang><_territory> (as I said before). None of the examples Nik stated show why we need the <.codeset> part. We've already shown why including that information hurts the Japanese docs. Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906252232.PAA04362>