From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 43277 invoked by alias); 6 Jun 2019 09:42:43 -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 43125 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jun 2019 09:42:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No, score=2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,GARBLED_BODY,KAM_MANYTO,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy==d0=b5=d0=bc=d0=b0, =d0=a1=d1, H*f:@kobylkin.com, HTo:U*siddhesh?= X-HELO: mail-wr1-f66.google.com Return-Path: Reply-To: Marko Myllynen Subject: Re: [PING^8][PATCH v12] Locales: Cyrillic -> ASCII transliteration [BZ #2872] To: Rafal Luzynski , "Diego (Egor) Kobylkin" , Carlos O'Donell , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" , "libc-locales@sourceware.org" , Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: Mike Fabian References: <2030695416.914859.1559778544120@poczta.nazwa.pl> From: Marko Myllynen Message-ID: Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2019 09:42:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2030695416.914859.1559778544120@poczta.nazwa.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2019-q2/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 Hi, On 06/06/2019 02.49, Rafal Luzynski wrote: > 5.06.2019 08:47 "Diego (Egor) Kobylkin" wrote: >> >> ping > > I second these pings. Marko, Carlos, Siddhesh, Mike, is there anything > else I can do here? My understanding of the overall situation here is that for 2.30 we try to have Cyrillic->ASCII transliteration added into the built-in C locale and after that we would discuss more about translit rules used by other locales, and that this C locale patch is pending on Carlos to complete his verification efforts. Does the above sound correct to you? > Since the questions may sound overwhelming, I'd like to focus on > a single issue: Yes, the subject becomes overwhelming if considering everything related at the same time so this sounds like a good approach, however are there other notable open questions left around the C locale rules in addition to this? (Ignoring the more generic tranlit rules or other locales for the time being.) > How should we handle the upper/lower case when a single Cyrillic letter > is transliterated to a Latin digraph (trigraph, etc.)? > > Possible answers (Cyrillic -> Latin Extended -> ASCII): > > 1. "Ш" -> "Š" -> "SH" > > e.g.: "Шема" -> "Šema" -> "SHema" > "Схема" ----------> "Shema" > > 2. "Ш" -> "Š" -> "Sh" > > e.g.: "Шема" -> "Šema" -> "Shema" > "Схема" ----------> "Shema" > > Personally I don't like the answer 1. because "SHema" looks weird > to me. Egor in turn does not like the answer 2. because the output > string becomes ambiguous. > > Should we maybe have a smart algorithm which would select the title > case or the upper case of the output characters depending on the > context in the word? Note that it would not resolve the problem of > the output text being ambiguous. It seems clear that there is no one right/wrong answer but it's a matter of preference, especially the way this currently works. It might be an improvement to output (for instance) SH instead of Sh if all the other letters of a word are upper-case as well but not sure what would help with the result being unambiguous. Thanks, -- Marko Myllynen