- From: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 10:23:22 +1000
- To: ishida@w3.org, 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 Thu, Jul 28, 2016, at 02:00 AM, ishida@w3.org wrote: > On 27/07/2016 08:18, Xidorn Quan wrote: > > Richard: could you review this list as well > > hi Xidorn, here are some thoughts from a quick review. > > i think you're missing zh on its own. zh is something pre-exists and browsers already agree with each other, so I ignore it. But yeah, if we put the list in some document, we should include this as well. > Also, if this is a list of what people/applications may use to describe > the language of a page, you should probably add zh-CN, zh-TW and zh-HK > to your list (but not to any list in clreq). They would just be mapped to themselves I suppose. > I suppose there's also a way to match something like zh-yue-HK to zh-yue? I think zh-yue-HK would fallback to zh-yue automatically given the list, shouldn't it? But if you write zh-yue-CN, hmmm... > I guess the use of =zh-CN rather than =zh-Hans is a legacy issue with > the way things are labelled in the code? It would be nice to use the > script codes rather than region codes, if possible, since that properly > expresses what is meant. Probably... Internally we actually map zh-Hans to zh-CN :) - Xidorn
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2016 00:23:47 UTC