No, the patterns should always have the right format. However, in the
supplemental data there is information as to the preferred data for each
language. This data isn't collected through the ST, so a ticket needs to be
filed.
In your particular case, the data has:
If DE just doesn't use hB,
F'up2: cldr-us...@unicode.org
Doug Ewell via unicode@unicode.org:
>
> I think that is a measurement of locale coverage -- whether the
> collation tables and translations of "a.m." and "p.m." and "a week ago
> Thursday" are correct and verified -- not character coverage.
By the way, the binary
Right, Doug. I'll say a few more words.
In terms of language support, encoding of new characters in Unicode
benefits mostly digital heritage languages (via representation of historic
languages in Unicode, enabling preservation and scholarly work), although
there are some modern-use cases like
3 matches
Mail list logo
