Re: [elreq] Why doesn't Intl.Locale include the Ethiopic numbering system for Ethiopic Locales (#132)

> @Eazash, CLDR locales , each have different levels of completeness and support. Both `am` and `ti` locales include _ethiopic_ as a traditional number system. `gez` does not.
> 
> `am` has spellout rules, but `ti` and `gez` don't. Locale coverage isn't uniform.

It's not uniform, but it is documented.  There's a chart here https://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/dev/supplemental/locale_coverage.html that shows that `am` is at modern level,  `ti` at basic, and `gez` is not even at basic level.  

contributions are welcome, feel free to contact me directly by any method if interested.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by srl295
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/elreq/issues/132#issuecomment-1749123648 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Thursday, 5 October 2023 15:22:05 UTC