> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 09:23:26 +0200 > From: Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 05:30:36AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 07:17:08PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 18:06:52 +0200 > > > > > From: Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > Regarding how those informations are provided, my preference is still > > > > > > > > > > @documentlanguage lang_REGION_variant1_variant2... > > > > > @documentscript script > > > > > > > > What will @documentscript be used for, again? > > > > > > For the manual alphabet. The recommendation would be to have the user > > > specify something only if different from the usual language alphabet. > > > > What will Texinfo use that for? > > In texi2any and Texinfo TeX, to select the right translated strings in > output and to select the right lang attributes in output formats.
But this is only possible if there are *.po files for the script, right? Is it likely that there will be such a .po file? > More generally, it is probably useful when translating manuals from > one language + script to another for the process of translation > itself when there are multiple possible scripts for a language. I'm not sure I understand how this would be useful in that case. The source manual is already written, so whatever script it used is "stated" de-facto by the document itself, no? Or what am I missing?
