-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 383
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CLDR-18129 Investigate and fix (where necessary) invalid codes #4215
Merged
macchiati
merged 6 commits into
unicode-org:main
from
macchiati:CLDR-18129-Code-to-investigate-identifier-validity
Dec 2, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c83c899
CLDR-18129 Investigate and fix (where necessary) invalid codes
macchiati e4c3588
CLDR-18129 Clean up validity tests, adding new @MATCH option validity…
macchiati 8f6da1d
CLDR-18129 Hack around SupplementalDataInfo.getInstance() on old ver…
macchiati a1e078e
CLDR-18129 Fix outliers
macchiati 573fb1d
CLDR-18129 Delete rna.xml in exemplars directory (the language code i…
macchiati fca637b
CLDR-18129 Give /[xn]locale/ better names
macchiati File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file was deleted.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think this is a great situation. Woods Cree isn't a "longer" form of Cree.
Content (whether a document, an audio recording, etc.) isn't going to be just in Cree, it's going to be in Woods Cree, or Plains Cree, or Swampy Cree, etc. Perhaps the macrolanguage isn't helpful here and should be removed. (The pronunciation and orthography is distinct between these three, in both Latn and Cans scripts.)
For now, I kind of think the best and most consistent change would be
<language type="cr">Woods Cree</language>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That would overturn from our long-standing policy for dealing with the compatibility mess that macrolangauges created.*
We don't say
and so on.
That is, we use the code and name of the macrolanguage for the predominant encompassed code. The one exception off the top of my head is for "zh", where we have:
So that's why it was "consistent" in following that model for Cree.
* If the macrolanguage policy had been consistently applied by ISO, they'd have made German (de) as a macrolanguage, and given a new code for Standard German (eg, dex?) as an encompassed language (and made the 30ish other Germans like Colonia Tovar German, Swiss German, Low German, and so on also be encompassed languages). And the same for many other languages (French, Hindi, ...).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would there be some option to have CLDR decide that cr isn't (Or isn't considered) a macrolanguage? And just allow
cwd
to stand on its own?I hear you about consistency but it does not work with the identity of the languages encompassed under cr.
The difference with German is that people do refer to
de
as Deutsch whereas even the name of the language differs between cwd/crk/csw - nehenawewin, neheyawewin and nehethawewin (not respectively).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Those appear to be just the same word with slightly different pronunciations in different dialects, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree_language#Dialect_criteria, which is exposed because written Cree is more phonetic than English.
It's as if we said that there were 3 different names for English: /ˈɪŋɡlɪʃ/ (UK), /ˈɪŋlɪʃ/ (US), /ˈɪŋɡləʃ/ (AU).
(They also appear to be really different dialects, not different languages, at a least according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Cree)
We should take this up in further in our next meeting: I filed https://unicode-org.atlassian.net/browse/CLDR-18142 about this.
In the meantime, I'll put out a call for taking the ticket for 47. We can always reverse the change for cr should TC decide it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm fine to land and then discuss. And I know this is long standing policy and not new.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right but one is not more general or more representative than the other. There are vocabulary differences as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Generality, representativity, vocabulary differences, are not relevant to choosing the predominant encompassed language.
As I said, let's discuss in the meeting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As you mentioned, this change isn't about Macrolanguages -- it's about validity. So I'll accept to unblock. We probably don't have enough time to properly discuss the issue before the new year anyway, so let's not get ahead of ourselves.
We should follow up in a separate ticket -- but decide the timeline for this.