On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:28:57AM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
> If a multi-billion dollar company whose employees have all learned
> British English decide that their documentation should be in
> American English, that's saying something.
It says that they feel Americans are too provincial.
27.09.2001 pisze Bill Wohler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> If a multi-billion dollar company whose employees have all learned
> British English decide that their documentation should be in
> American English, that's saying something.
That's saying nothing. Debian IS NOT multi-billion dollar compan
On Thu, 2001-09-27 at 17:28, Bill Wohler wrote:
> Sean Middleditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Why such emphasis? The idea is to spell words like "colour" instead of
> > > "color", not to write the ls man page in iambic pentameter.
>
> No, the idea is to spell it "color," not "colour."
>
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:28:57AM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
> Sean Middleditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Why such emphasis? The idea is to spell words like "colour" instead of
> > > "color", not to write the ls man page in iambic pentameter.
>
> No, the idea is to spell it "color," not
Sean Middleditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Why such emphasis? The idea is to spell words like "colour" instead of
> > "color", not to write the ls man page in iambic pentameter.
No, the idea is to spell it "color," not "colour."
The mass of writing in the computer world is American Eng
On 27 Sep 2001, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> At 2001-09-27T00:32:08Z, Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ...the French thinking that French is the lingua franca of the world. It's
> > only wishful thinking.
> >From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary:
> Lingua Franca \Lin"gua Fran"ca\
At 2001-09-27T00:32:08Z, Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ...the French thinking that French is the lingua franca of the world. It's
> only wishful thinking.
>From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary:
Lingua Franca \Lin"gua Fran"ca\ (l[i^][ng]"gw[.a]
fr[a^][ng]"k[.a]). [It.,
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 12:58:31AM -0500, Scott Dier wrote:
> * Sam Couter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010926 23:13]:
> > only language of the computing world? Pull your head out of your arse (not
> > your ass, that's a donkey) and take a good look around. The world is much
>
> Actually, its a synonym fo
On Thu, 27 Sep 2001, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 07:44:05AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > Maybe we should just use Debian English or Internet English, wich
> > means: produce something legible by other inhabitants of the Internet
> > and/or Debian, and who cares abo
Previously Duncan Findlay wrote:
> I also think it's ridiculous that everybody be forced to write Debian
> documentation in American English.
Nobody is forced to, and everything I write is in real (British)
English.
Wichert.
--
_
>> Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems to me that "American English", "Australian English", "British
> English", "Singaporese(?) English", "Hong Kong English", "Canadian
> English", etc. are most appropriate; there is no reason for one
> particular variant to be called "English.
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:04:50AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > Doesn't solve the problem of the default charset though...
>
> iso8859-1 covers most people, doesn't it? I mean, as a default. I
> admit I don't know a lot about charsets - iso8859-1 is enough for me
> to comunicate in Italian
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 08:04:50AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > Doesn't solve the problem of the default charset though...
>
> iso8859-1 covers most people, doesn't it? I mean, as a default. I
> admit I don't know a lot about charsets - iso8859-1 is enough for me
> to comunicate in Italian
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 07:44:05AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > Maybe we should just use Debian English or Internet English, wich
> > means: produce something legible by other inhabitants of the
> > Internet and/or Debian, and who cares about the details.
* Sam Couter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010926 23:13]:
> only language of the computing world? Pull your head out of your arse (not
> your ass, that's a donkey) and take a good look around. The world is much
Actually, its a synonym for ass, but whos counting? While were on the
track of gross generaliza
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 07:44:05AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> Maybe we should just use Debian English or Internet English, wich
> means: produce something legible by other inhabitants of the Internet
> and/or Debian, and who cares about the details.
Now there's a definition I can live with.
Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Seems to me that "American English", "Australian English", "British
> English", "Singaporese(?) English", "Hong Kong English", "Canadian
> English", etc. are most appropriate; there is no reason for one
> particular variant to be called "English."
As p
> Just my 2/100 Euro. (What are fractional Euros called in English
> anyway? Cents?)
Euro Cents or just Euro...
-Thomas
--
Thomas S. Strathmann
http://www.tstrathmann.de & http://www.pdp7.org
pgpFoct9mmF3H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 02:12:46PM +1000, Sam Couter wrote:
> > Therefore, without emotion and with a pragmatic hand to guide me, I
> > feel that English should be an alias for en_US.
>
> s/without emotion/with typical American patriotism/
> s/pragmatic/dogmatic/
Patriotism != jingoism.
--
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having the English think that British English is the lingua franca of
> the computing world is the same as the French thinking that French
> is the lingua franca of the world. It's only wishful thinking.
And how is that different to Americans thinking
As a practical standpoint, the localization choices for English go
well beyond spelling... each English variant by definition
incorporates local variations in date format, currencies, etc. (Even
en_IE and en_GB aren't the same any more, due to the Euro.)
Seems to me that "American English", "Aust
On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> On Wed, 2001-09-26 at 20:50, Ben Burton wrote:
> >
> > > British English is beautiful where it appears in poems, plays, and
> > > novels by Shakespeare and Wilde and other brilliant English authors.
> > > It certainly does N
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Bill Wohler wrote:
> I think English should be an alias for en_US.
Of course you do; you're /from/ the US.
> Having the English think that British English is the lingua franca of
> the computing world is the same as the French thinking that French
> is the lingua fra
also sprach Duncan Findlay (on Wed, 26 Sep 2001 08:54:40PM -0400):
> But, putting my own radical beliefs aside, I think that English should
> definitely be an alias for en_GB, seeing how "American" really isn't "English"
> per se.
agreed!
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.
On Wed, 2001-09-26 at 20:50, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > British English is beautiful where it appears in poems, plays, and
> > novels by Shakespeare and Wilde and other brilliant English authors.
> > It certainly does NOT belong in the ls man page.
>
> Why such emphasis? The idea is to spell
> British English is beautiful where it appears in poems, plays, and
> novels by Shakespeare and Wilde and other brilliant English authors.
> It certainly does NOT belong in the ls man page.
Why such emphasis? The idea is to spell words like "colour" instead of
"color", not to write the ls
On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 05:32:08PM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
> I think English should be an alias for en_US.
>
> Having the English think that British English is the lingua franca of
> the computing world is the same as the French thinking that French
> is the lingua franca of the world. I
John Hasler wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> > Surely there are locales for welsh and Scottish gaelic?
>
> Keith G. Murphy writes:
> > I should think not. Those are two *very* different Celtic languages.
>
> Nor did I say otherwise. Read my sentence as "Surely there is a locale for
> welsh and also a loc
I wrote:
> Surely there are locales for welsh and Scottish gaelic?
Keith G. Murphy writes:
> I should think not. Those are two *very* different Celtic languages.
Nor did I say otherwise. Read my sentence as "Surely there is a locale for
welsh and also a locale for Scottish gaelic".
--
John Has
John Hasler wrote:
>
> > that.
>
> Surely there are locales for welsh and Scottish gaelic?
> --
I should think not. Those are two *very* different Celtic languages.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 04:37:45PM +0100, Nick Phillips wrote:
> Besides, it was probably the ignorant Brits on the committee that decided
> on the codes that insisted that they didn't like "UK" :(
Well, UK is rather improper for a country code, because that is an acronym
for a generic term. Same
Nick Phillips writes:
> Besides, it was probably the ignorant Brits on the committee that decided
> on the codes that insisted that they didn't like "UK" :(
But GB is listed opposite "United Kingdom", not "Great Britain". A
political compromise, I guess.
I assume residents of Northern Ireland su
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 07:42:53AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Nick writes:
> > So using "GB" as a country code is incorrect, as Great Britain is *NOT* a
> > country, really.
>
> You better have a talk with the ISO about that.
[grin]
There are enough fucked-up standards out there that one more w
Nick writes:
> So using "GB" as a country code is incorrect, as Great Britain is *NOT* a
> country, really.
You better have a talk with the ISO about that.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:37:15PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
> residents thereof can explain the difference.
Great Britain == England, Wales, Scotland
United Kingdom == England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland
British Isle
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> IIRC, the UK is England, Wales and Scotland, while Great Britain includes
> Northern Ireland, and a few other colonies.
The other way around.
UK is the country, GB is the island.
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Laurent de Segur wrote:
> Things are getting confusing. Great Britain used to be called Britain by the
> Romans (so if someone still does on this list, he must be very old.) Great
> was not just added to include other places. Great Britain is just the modern
> and correct way
Yow!
Things are getting confusing. Great Britain used to be called Britain by the
Romans (so if someone still does on this list, he must be very old.) Great
was not just added to include other places. Great Britain is just the modern
and correct way to call it. This or you can use UK, a synonym wi
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Branden Robinson wrote:
> AIUI, the island on which you find England,
> Scotland, and Wales is called Britain. I'm not sure how "Great" modifies
> that unless it's to include some of the smaller outlying islands, like
> the Shetlands and the Isle of Man.
>
The island where E
Stephen Stafford writes:
> en_UK doesn't exist as a locale AFAIK, it is en_GB I believe.
http://www.bcpl.net/~jspath/isocodes.html lists UK as United Kingdom and GB
as Great Britain but digitalid.verisign.com/ccodes.html lists only GB and
as United Kingdom. It lists nothing for UK. I guess UK is
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 05:07:07PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:37:15PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> > Steve Langasek writes:
> > > en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
> >
> > While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
> > res
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:37:15PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
>
> While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
> residents thereof can explain the difference.
Well, I'm not a resident thereof,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 19 Sep 2001 8:37 pm, John Hasler wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
>
> While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of
> the residents thereof can explain the differenc
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, David Starner wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:57:06AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On 19 Sep 2001, Gilbert Laycock wrote:
> >
> > > I believe that en_UK would be for Ukrainian english. The mind boggles.
> There's an en_DA, and someone was arguing for basically a en_SK
>> en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
>
>While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
>residents thereof can explain the difference.
Well, no. `GB' seems to be the ISO country code for the United Kingdom,
perverse as that might appear.
p.
pgptzf0wFL9
On 19 Sep 2001, John Hasler wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
>
> While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
> residents thereof can explain the difference.
IIRC, the UK is England, Wales and Scotland, while Great Br
Steve Langasek writes:
> en_UK is English as spoken in the United Kingdom.
While en_GB is english as spoken in Great Britain. Perhpas one of the
residents thereof can explain the difference.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:57:06AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On 19 Sep 2001, Gilbert Laycock wrote:
>
> > I believe that en_UK would be for Ukrainian english. The mind boggles.
There's an en_DA, and someone was arguing for basically a en_SK recently.
It wouldn't be unprecedented.
> en_UK i
Gustavo Noronha Silva writes:
> nah that's not it... if I understand it correctly, "united states"
> would map to es_US and "england" would map to en_EN(UK?)...
es_US would be spanish as used in the US, wouldn't it?
How about this: "United States" maps to:
Please choose a language
On 19 Sep 2001, Gilbert Laycock wrote:
> > Em Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:11:06 +1000
> > Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> > > I agree. This argument sounds reasonable. If spanish maps to Spain, then
> > > english should map to England.
> > nah that's not it... if I understand it correct
Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Em Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:11:06 +1000
> Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
>
> > I agree. This argument sounds reasonable. If spanish maps to Spain, then
> > english should map to England.
> nah that's not it... if I understand it corr
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 11:21:02AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> "Oliver Elphick" writes:
>
> > Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> > >Le ven, sep 14, 2001, 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a crit:
> > ...
> > >(by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> > >display compl
Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> in Cyrille's headers, which look fine.
...same here... I wonder if Gnus is doing some auto-detect action?
I wouldn'
Le ven, sep 14, 2001, à 12:39:31 -0500, David Starner a écrit:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 06:02:45PM +0200, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> > it looks like it's because your default locale is 8859-1.
>
> Nope. My default locale is UTF-8. As someone else said, your headers
> look fine.
I stand correcte
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:07:43AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> My bug was triggered by the fact that gdm offers a long selection of
> languages, among them English (without bells and whistles, just plain
GDM does not offer english. It offers POSIX/C English, which sets lang
to "C". gdm
Le ven, sep 14, 2001, à 09:39:55 -0500, David Starner a écrit:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:39:10AM +0200, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> > (by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> > display completely on your screen ?)
>
> Here it does. The message I got was properly
"Oliver Elphick" writes:
> Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> >Le ven, sep 14, 2001, 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a crit:
> ...
> >(by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> >display completely on your screen ?)
>
> Your message didn't specify any character set, so
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 09:39:10AM +0200, Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> (by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> display completely on your screen ?)
Here it does. The message I got was properly labeled as ISO-8859-1, too.
--
David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pointl
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 08:54:40AM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> >Le ven, sep 14, 2001, 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a crit:
> ...
> >(by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> >display completely on your screen ?)
>
> Your messag
>> Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On a very different topic, I cannot even type in
> franc,ais in my system, and it seems to be a character not available
> in the default locale which is C.
>
> How are people meant to handle this?
I have LC_CTYPE=en_US (or LC_CTYPE=en_US.ISO
Le ven, sep 14, 2001, à 08:54:40 +0100, Oliver Elphick a écrit:
> Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
> >Le ven, sep 14, 2001, 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a crit:
> ...
> >(by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
> >display completely on your screen ?)
>
> Your messag
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 10:47:18AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> What I meant to say is simple: you can't know what language people speak
> by having a look at the country they live in. Thus, the english do _not_,
> by definition, speak english.
I never said that you could.
You're splitting ha
On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
>
> > On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > > [*] By definition, the English speak English. What the Americans speak is
> > > different to what the English speak. Therefore the Americans do
Cyrille Chepelov wrote:
>Le ven, sep 14, 2001, 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a crit:
...
>(by the way, does the line mutt added at the very beginning of this post
>display completely on your screen ?)
Your message didn't specify any character set, so the non-ASCII
characters seem to have b
Le ven, sep 14, 2001, à 04:13:31 +0900, Junichi Uekawa a écrit:
> On a very different topic, I cannot even type in
> franc,ais in my system, and it seems to be a character not available
> in the default locale which is C.
C does not specify a charset outside ASCII, does it ? On my system, with
L
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
On a very different topic, I cannot even type in
franc,ais in my system, and it seems to be a character not available
in the default locale which is C.
How are people meant to handle this?
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECT
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > [*] By definition, the English speak English. What the Americans speak is
> > different to what the English speak. Therefore the Americans don't speak
> > English.
>
> That would mean the Belgia
Em 13 Sep 2001 20:06:22 +0200
Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> > nah that's not it... if I understand it correctly, "united states"
> > would map to es_US and "england" would map to en_EN(UK?)...
>
> my english is really that poor? i meant that if french maps to the fr_FR
michael heyes writes:
> Don't forget Dutch, French and German in Belgium.
French and english in Canada, spanish and mayan in Guatemala, german and
french in Switzerland... and yet the US gets singled out for criticism
because we refer to our most common language as english. Why?
There is no one
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 01:01:12AM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 20:32, David Starner wrote:
>
> > is enm_UK (assuming that the locale system uses 3 character codes
> > where a 2 character one is not available), not en_UK.
>
> hey, i'd like to know _why_ enm... :)
We
On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 20:32, David Starner wrote:
> > english is _also_ how the americans call their language, but
> > i think it was called english even before Colombo, right?
>
> It's en_UK, btw. And the locale code for pre-Columbus English
ack. just a typo...
> is enm_UK (assuming that the
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Nick Phillips wrote:
> [*] By definition, the English speak English. What the Americans speak is
> different to what the English speak. Therefore the Americans don't speak
> English.
That would mean the Belgian would speak Belgian, right?
I doubt it...
--
wouter dot verhels
Don't forget Dutch, French and German in Belgium.
michael heyes
Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/13/2001 11:55:08 AM
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
cc:
Subject: Re: A language by any other name
Em 13 Sep 2001 09:39:07 -0500
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 08:06:22PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 18:26, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> > Em Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:11:06 +1000
> > Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> >
> > > I agree. This argument sounds reasonable. If spanish maps to Spain, the
On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 18:26, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> Em Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:11:06 +1000
> Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
>
> > I agree. This argument sounds reasonable. If spanish maps to Spain, then
> > english should map to England.
> nah that's not it... if I understand
Em Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:15:28 +0900
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
>
> > deutsch de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> > > french fr_FR.ISO-8859-1
> > german de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> > portuguese pt_
Em Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:11:06 +1000
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> I agree. This argument sounds reasonable. If spanish maps to Spain, then
> english should map to England.
nah that's not it... if I understand it correctly, "united states"
would map to es_US and "england" would m
Em 13 Sep 2001 09:39:07 -0500
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> Federico writes:
> > ...spain for spanish, italy for italian, france for french,
> > etc. everybody is accepting that on other languages, don't see why the
> > americans should do different...
>
> Right. Swiss for Switzerl
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 04:11:39PM +0200, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> Okey. Then english SHOULD point to en_UK.ISO-8859-1. If disagreement with
> americans should block this inclusion, portuguese should be removed too.
> Since the most frequencly use portuguese is Brazilian.
Sure. GDM should
On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 16:39, John Hasler wrote:
> Federico writes:
> > ...spain for spanish, italy for italian, france for french,
> > etc. everybody is accepting that on other languages, don't see why the
> > americans should do different...
>
> Right. Swiss for Switzerland, belgian for Belgium,
Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 11:35, David N. Welton wrote:
> > "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > My bug was triggered by the fact that gdm offers a long selection
> > > of languages, among them English (without bells and whistles, just
> > > pl
>
> What's the problem? German is spoken outside Germany. That what's
> spoken outside Germany is not the same as that what's spoken inside
> Germany, but that what's spoken outside is still called German
> (officially), as far as I know. That is to say, de_AT.ISO-8859-1 is as
> "german" a
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 02:34:45PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> >
> > Maybe it should ask if you want british or american english.
> >
> why? we know what is *the* english, the one that originated in england.
> (note how the two words have the same root, eng-?) as a pratical rule, i
> sug
Federico writes:
> ...spain for spanish, italy for italian, france for french,
> etc. everybody is accepting that on other languages, don't see why the
> americans should do different...
Right. Swiss for Switzerland, belgian for Belgium, canadian for Canada,
mexican for Mexico, brazilian for Braz
On Thursday 13 September 2001 11:07, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>
> deutsch de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> françaisfr_FR.ISO-8859-1
> french fr_FR.ISO-8859-1
> german de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> portuguese pt_PT.ISO-8859-1
> spanish es_ES.ISO-8859-1
On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 11:35, David N. Welton wrote:
> "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > My bug was triggered by the fact that gdm offers a long selection
> > of languages, among them English (without bells and whistles, just
> > plain old "English") and in case you select
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:07:43AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some days ago I submitted a bug (111465) against the "locales" package
> asking for the inclusion of the alias "english" for the locale
> "en_US.ISO-8851-1". Ben Collins, the maintainer of "locales", swiftly
> clos
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> deutsch de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> > french fr_FR.ISO-8859-1
> german de_DE.ISO-8859-1
> portuguese pt_PT.ISO-8859-1
> spanish es_ES.ISO-8859-1
If these refer to the "people", then th
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:46:06AM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> > 2 aliases, "english" for the English, "american" for the Americans.
>
> I don't speak 'american', though, I speak 'english', and will look for
> that, as will the rest of my compatriots, when asked to select the
> language I spe
Nick Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2 aliases, "english" for the English, "american" for the Americans.
I don't speak 'american', though, I speak 'english', and will look for
that, as will the rest of my compatriots, when asked to select the
language I speak. Nice try for a compromise, b
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My bug was triggered by the fact that gdm offers a long selection
> of languages, among them English (without bells and whistles, just
> plain old "English") and in case you select that, it sets the
> environment variable LANG to that, "engli
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:07:43AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> But Ben wants a consensus, so I'm asking here.
>
> FWIW, that file *is* shipped with locales as /etc/locale.alias, even if
> there's no sensible default for some entries there, as I have shown
> above.
2 aliases, "english
On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:07:43AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> But Ben wants a consensus, so I'm asking here.
I would alias english to en_UK, since it is reasonable to choose the flavour
spoken in the language of origin.
--
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
Guus Sliepen <[E
93 matches
Mail list logo
