On Tuesday, July 16, 2019 11:38 AM, Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak@lingonborough.com> wrote:
> 13.07.2019 12:03 "Diego (Egor) Kobylkin" egor@kobylkin.com wrote:
> 

> > To the V9 patch - my understanding is that we have agreed to handle it as
> > a new feature because it is actually not fixing [BZ #2872] per se (and V12
> > does). I am not going to work on it for 2.30 and if you, Rafal, or someone
> > else wants to take ownership and push it I'm more than happy to help.
> 

> OK, so IIUC your goal is to provide Cyrillic to plain ASCII transliteration
> according to GOST 7.79 System B standard, when the locale is set to C
> (or any derivative, like C.UTF-8). You don't want ISO 9 a.k.a. GOST 7.79
> System A (Cyrillic to Latin extended) with a possible fallback to plain
> ASCII and in many other locales because you consider this as a separate
> task which may be done later, not in this release cycle. Is that
> correct?

Yes, this is correct.

Here is the original email with the explanation:

https://marc.info/?l=glibc-alpha&m=154430592326862&w=2
On 08.12.18 22:51, Egor Kobylkin wrote:> Rafal, Dmitry, Marko, Mike
> 

> On 08.12.18 00:35, Rafal Luzynski wrote:
>> 19.11.2018 12:10 Egor Kobylkin <egor@kobylkin.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Changelog v10: * Removed ISO 9.1995 GOST 7.79-2000 System A
>>> (transliteration to Latin with diacritics) as conflicting with
>>> System B within glibc mechanics and not solving BZ #2872
>>
>> I'm in favor of implementing System A and dropping System B instead.
> 

> The BZ #2872 bug name is explicitly "Transliteration Cyrillic -> ASCII
> fails". The ISO 9 System A does not map to ASCII so it is not a solution
> to BZ #2872 at all.
> 

> I was scratching my head as to how can we avoid the explosion of the
> scope for this patch. And then it appeared to me that it was wrong to
> target all the present locales for the ASCII translit. This seems to be
> the root cause for this prolonged A vs. B discussions. The proper target
> for my table is actually the C locale translit file
> (locale/C-translit.h.in). I will submit a proper patch shortly.
> 

> If anyone wants to keep working on the implementation of the Latin
> Diacritics transliteration of the Cyrillic letters (System A) you are
> welcome to use the tables I have submitted before (v9). That would be a
> new feature for glibc as per my understanding. Let's just make super
> clear the distinction of the System A (Latin with Diacritics, non-ASCII)
> to the ASCII translit as mentioned in BZ #2872 (System B).
> 

> My focus is super sharp on helping with Cyrillic -> ASCII translit
> availability for a default installation with glibc.
> 

> Hope this helps,
> Egor
> 


Bests,
Egor