Re: be-tarask

[Zmicer Turok <nashtlumach@gmail.com>]

Also in CLDR is missing be-Latn, but but it exists in the libc.  https://github.com/unicode-org/cldr/tree/master/common/main



On 25 лютага 2020 08.07.01 GMT+03:00, Zmicer Turok <nashtlumach@gmail.com> wrote:
>Taraškievica is not supported by any official and/or scientific
>institution, but there are philologists and writers who use this
>spelling. There are much more, the weight of those who use be-latn.
>There are as many users. Approximate activity can be viewed in the
>Wikipedia. The layout is no different from "be", there are necessary
>chars. Sense to add a locale exists.
>
>On 24 лютага 2020 23.36.20 GMT+03:00, Rafal Luzynski
><digitalfreak@lingonborough.com> wrote:
>>24.02.2020 16:18 Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 2/24/20 10:02 AM, Zmicer Turok wrote:
>>> > Hi, tell me please, is it possible to add a locale be-tarask for
>>> > Belarusian?
>>> 
>>> Locales can certainly be added if people are willing to do the work
>>to add
>>> them.
>>> 
>>> Can you please explain what be-tarask would represent?
>>
>>be-tarask is an alternative (classical, old) spelling of Belarusian
>>language
>>using the Cyrillic script (same as be_BY). [1]
>>
>>> We currently have be_BY and be_BY@latin (latin script version).
>>
>>The bug report and the discussion is here: [2]
>>
>>Last time I asked a native speaker I was told that less and less
>people
>>use
>>that spelling so it is not worth adding.  Has anything changed
>>recently?
>> Are
>>there people willing to use it?
>>
>>Another obstacle is that the variant is not supported by CLDR.  Also
>>I'm
>>not sure if Taraškievica is supported by any official and/or
>scientific
>>institution.  It may be difficult to verify the correctness of the
>>data.
>>However, if we overcome these difficulties adding be_BY@tarask is
>>possible.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Rafal
>>
>>
>>[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara%C5%A1kievica
>>[2] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1015