From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 901 invoked by alias); 20 Dec 2018 00:06:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-locales-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-locales-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 878 invoked by uid 89); 20 Dec 2018 00:06:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*x:Mailer, H*UA:Mailer, letter, our X-HELO: shared-ano163.rev.nazwa.pl X-Spam-Score: -1 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:06:00 -0000 From: Rafal Luzynski To: Egor Kobylkin , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-locales@sourceware.org, "Dmitry V. Levin" , Marko Myllynen , mfabian@redhat.com Message-ID: <152688221.674690.1545264335649@poczta.nazwa.pl> In-Reply-To: References: <41532e13-a63d-5df1-ab37-05eb4d6c8d0a@kobylkin.com> <20180412224352.GB2911@altlinux.org> <676c37bd-ba92-a7ed-019e-94974143233f@kobylkin.com> <1718190635.706992.1544225756803@poczta.nazwa.pl> <749726562.674232.1545259279320@poczta.nazwa.pl> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration table [BZ #2872] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2018-q4/txt/msg00143.txt.bz2 20.12.2018 00:02 Egor Kobylkin wrote: > [...] > But I'm not sure anymore that inserting a translit table into every > locale is the right solution for ASCII problem. Especially because > distributions may not include any locale but C. My question (and my doubt) is whether they want to support Cyrillic transliteration in that case. If yes then maybe they also want more transliterations as well. I'm not telling we will include them now, just wonder what is the reason why they were not yet included in C. > [...] > Actually there are quite a few letters already transliterated in > locale/C-translit.h.in. Sure, my list was not complete and I did not mean there are no Latin characters supported. But there is nothing from the long list of =C3=A1, =C3=A0, =C3=A4, =C3=A3, =C7=8E, =C3=A5, =C4=81, =C4=85, =E1=BA=A1, = =C8=A7, =C4=87, =C4=89, =C3=A7, =C3=A9, =C3=A8, =C3=AB, ... > (Note the CAPCAP transliteration style for the > capitals, i.e. LATIN CAPITAL LETTER AE is mapped to AE, not to Ae.) Sure, because they are ligatures: "A" + "E", not "A" + "e". Note that where three variants of ligatures exist, like "LJ", "Lj", "lj" then all three are supported. > [ cut the list ] >=20 > > [...] > > I understand your aim and I agree to support ASCII. Our disagreements > > are: > >=20 > > * whether to support conversion Cyrillic -> extended Latin as well, > no contest on my side > > * which standard to implement, > no contest on my side > > * what to do if the standard is ambiguous or if some details cannot be > > implemented for technical reasons. > no contest on my side either Good, three steps forward. Regards, Rafal