Mark Purcell wrote: > On Friday 09 April 2010 08:30:14 Albert Astals Cid wrote: >> hm? eh? what? why would we remove a perfectly valid translation to a >> language spoken by 11 million people? > > Albert, > > I don't think the issue is the removal of the translations, rather the > fact that the locale-code hne isn't defined in ISO 639-1 & ISO 639-2. > > My reading of Chhattisgarhi_language[1] shows that the ISO 639-3 code is > "hne", whilst the ISO 639-2 code for this family is "inc". > > I am raising this as an inconsistency. If we are accepting ISO 639-3 > locales then that is fine too and we will fix lintian. >
Right, but the first faulty package is isoquery. The isoquery program is not able to display the ISO 639-3 codes: > TODO for Isoquery > ================= > > - allow use of ISO 639-3 The reason I assume is that there's no (given the nature of the ISO 639-3 standard) translation table between ISO 639-3 and ISO 639-2 codes. So I guess the most we can do is just inject the 639-3 codes and hope for the best (i.e. hope people is going to use the best and most appropriate ISO 639-1..3 code.) Sorry for not noticing ISO 639-3 codes were being used back when I implemented the checks. I verified some of the cases that would trigger the warning but they were all true positives. And like Russ said, switching to the "inc" code would be incorrect. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-i18n-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4bbe9167.9f15f10a.4bd2.2...@mx.google.com
