Re: [PING^10][PATCH v12] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration [BZ #2872]

[Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@lingonborough.com>]

9.07.2019 08:34 Marko Myllynen <myllynen@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> It seems that we have consensus so is there anything still left with this?

I think it's helpful to clarify which patches we are talking about.
I think that these TWO patches should be accepted and pushed:

1. [PATCH v12] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration [BZ #2872]
   https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-03/msg00378.html

It contains Cyrillic to plain ASCII transliteration according to
GOST 7.79-2000 System B standard for the C locales

2. [PATCH v9] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration table [BZ #2872]
   https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2018-11/msg00369.html

It contains Cyrillic to Latin extended transliteration according to
ISO 9 standard which is the same as GOST 7.79-2000 System A for almost
all locales, plus a fallback to plain ASCII which is as similar as possible
to GOST 7.70-2000 System A.  However, IMHO one more change is required:
the line converting <U0423><U0301> and <U0443><U0301> (Cyrillic U with
acute, using composition) should be removed, as it was removed in the
v10 of the patch.

Why don't I like v10?  Because it removes the fallback.  The fallback
is not perfect and does not comply with any standard but it has been
already stated that the transliteration does not have to be perfect.

Why these two patches?  Because the v12 contains only Cyrillic to plain
ASCII and only for the C locales while v9 contains Cyrillic to Latin
extended with an attempt to fallback to plain ASCII for many locales
but excluding C.

Additionally, I think we should mention this new feature in NEWS also
stating that this implementation is not perfect and will never be but
further works on the issue are expected in future versions.

> @Egor, do you think the commit message of the latest patch is ok or
> should it be somehow amended by the recent discussions leading to
> consensus or is it ok as-is?

Probably one or two more lines would be nice.

Regards,

Rafal