Is there a specific reason why locals can't participate in the CLDR? We
found an organization to sponsor us for our locale so we would get
enough votes, and we are being listened to.
Sgrìobh k...@keldix.com na leanas 27/07/2015 aig 12:30:
> Funny, I would say the opposite. Our data is reported by
Funny, I would say the opposite. Our data is reported by local people,
where CLDR are managed centrally, somtimes against advice from locals.
Best regards
keld
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 08:36:56AM +0100, Fòram na Gàidhlig wrote:
> If in doubt, I would go with the CLDR, because that is what the CLD
Our conclusion regarding Latvian (lv) is that neither our current rules nor
CLDR's are wrong. Both get the important parts right, that is:
- 0 always goes with a certain plural -- this is the basis of CLDR's
category "zero" and GTK's plural 2,
- all n where n%10>=2 except 11..19 go with a certain d
If in doubt, I would go with the CLDR, because that is what the CLDR is
for. Note that they have a new major release coming up soon, so maybe
best wait with any changes until that has gone through. If anybody of
the affected languages thinks that the CLDR data is wrong, I recommend
that you get inv
