W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > July to September 2016

Re: Simplified or traditional for each Chinese macrolanguage

From: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:34:10 +1000
Message-Id: <1469590450.4034148.677844601.1344BBA7@webmail.messagingengine.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Cc: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, 董福興 <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, Makoto Kato <m_kato@ga2.so-net.ne.jp>, 劉慶 <ryukeikun@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Koji Ishii wrote:
> So Literary Chinese and Mandarin are hard to determine? I checked
> Windows region/locale/language settings but it doesn't seem to have
> these in the list.
Mandarin is just what we generally refer to by saying "Chinese".
Literary is a historic language of Chinese, which is not used in daily
life nowadays.
 
> Maybe we should handle them as "unknown", so that browsers fallback to
> use the system setting?
What should zh (without anthing else) do, actually? What happens to that
should probably be what we do for Mandarin and Literary.
 
> FYI, Wikipedia[1] already uses lzh", without script.
 
If we use Wikipedia as the criterion, the list would significantly
change. Basically as far as I can see, Wikipedia uses Traditional
Chinese in almost every Chinese languages it has a version for. But I
suspect that most of those Wikipedia are built by language enthusiasts,
and not used by people in general, so I tend not to pick that as a
criterion.
 
But on the other hand, I guess those language tags are almost only used
in Wikipedia, and not anywhere else...
 
- Xidorn
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2016 03:34:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 26 October 2016 23:39:18 UTC