Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Documentation: Start translations to Spanish

[Jonathan Corbet]

Resending without the screwy address that my mailer decided to put in
for Alex, sorry for the noise.

Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> writes:

> [Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]
>
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
>> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
>> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
>> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
>> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
>> zh-CN and zh-TW.
>>
>> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
>> as we do all dialects of English.
>>
>> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
>> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
>> we've been using up to now?
>
> I want to go hide somewhere :)
>
> I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
> is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
> could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.
>
> Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
> "Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
> there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
> with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
> other scripts.
>
> If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
> things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
> strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
> can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
> translation maintainers think?
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon