Christian Perrier, le Mon 29 Jun 2009 06:58:21 +0200, a écrit : > My point was *not* about showing a different list to users depending > on the language they selected. > > It was just about building *one* list that would offer users all > "reasonable" choices.
Ah. I'm still afraid that's not very scalable (you already announced ~70 choices, and I expect to see the list still growing, as there are something like a hundred scripts in Unicode, latin being just one while accounting for a lot of already existing keymaps...). When the default choice is correct, that should be ok, but for borderline cases, it will not be convenient for the user to browse it. > > > Here is what I come with (to be completed...I stopped at Kazakh): > > > > No need to do it by hand, it can be automated from xkeyboard-config's > > data. Any divergence from a hand-written version is just a bug in > > xkeyboard-config. > > I don't really see how such a list could be derived from > xkeyboard-config. With your point of view, that may be different indeed. > What there does tell me that I need a keymap for fr_FR, another for > fr_BE and fr_CH or fr_CA....while de_DE and de_AT are happy with the > same one? Thanks to the language/country tags attached to layouts and variants. The FR layout has a fra language tag, the BE layout has ger and a fra tags, the CH layout has ger and gsw tags, while its fr variant has a fra tag, the CA layout has a fra tag, the DE layout has a ger tag. There is no AT layout, but upstream will be happy to include one that just includes the DE one (and not the CH one). Yes, it would wear a different name than the DE one, but that's probably an opportunity to make the name clearer for the user. Yes, thus the list would get very long, and that's why I proposed to show several size-increasing versions. My point is: why should Debian maintain that information while it should already be in the xkb database? > > > probably around 70 for i386|amd64 and much much less for > > > arches where there is a need for a dedicated list > > > > Why a dedicated list? > > Because I see this as the only way to keep things simple. We would > then have to just maintain that "selection" of "common" keymaps. Why only the common keymaps? To mimic Franc's way of asking: aren't people using uncommon keymaps allowed to install Debian? I do agree that we should blacklist exotic keymaps like "my keymap with a lot of stuff to type unicode arrows" in d-i, but there are keymaps for a lot of languages, and you are proposing to handle additions by hand, that's a pain. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
