On Sun, Apr 12, 2026 at 11:19:44PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > Maybe, be we can not say about all the languages in the IANA and we > should rely on the best information existing, which is this information. > For Occitan, which I know a bit about, the IANA is quite right, with the > main variants as would be expected today (lengadoc in the place I live). > There are written systems, lexics for computing related vocabulary. The > number of people speaking Occitan in general is decreasing, there are > probably not that many persons interested by Occitan for computer > related documentation and even less able to translate manuals and > strings, but still, deciding that Occitan variants cannot be used as > documentlanguage, while we have the information to do so seems wrong to > me.
Could we make @documentlanguage take the argument LL[_CC][@VARIANT] where VARIANT is the script, and add another command to specify language variant? For example: @documentlanguage oc @documentlanguagevariant lengadoc or @documentlanguage sr@latin @documentlanguagevariant ekavsk That way the translations using .po files can be used as usual and the "variant" can be used to mark the language in output formats where this is supported.
