day periods (from 00:0 to 24:00 : sometimes "night", but generally included in "matin", then "midi", "après-midi", "soir") are also used in French muct more usefully than the ambiguous and unused am/pm Latin abbreviations that fell compeltely out of use a few centuries ago
(side note: not sure if it was commonly abbreviated, most probably only in written form but not spelled orally where it would read only the full latin words in before French finally replaced the judiciary and liturgic "Late Vulgar Latin" language that no one was really understanding correctlmy and it was constantly creolized with the many regional vernacular oil languages instead of following the liturgic and judiciary style; at that time, the "ante/poste meridiem was only heard in christian masses or judiciary documents, both full of corportative jargons, and even different from the approximative Latin of the adminsitration; then Latin collapsed under regional oil languages that differentiated much between each other, before French was finally created, abandoning Latin as the sole source, but reinventing words borrowed from Greek and adapted to the Anjou oil variant used by ruling nobility and the neighborhood of the King and some passionate chuch personalities that also wanted to incoporate the several oc languages and other european languages for the diplomacy; then Frenchc took about 2 centuries to develop before it finally burnt most regional oil variants and nearly burnt also oc variants ; there remains some Latin expressions in French, but only for specific/technical usages, especially in the judiciary language, like in English; but English kept the "ante/post meridiem" only by its abbreviations, and today, most native English speakers don't know really what "am" and "pm" really means). So yes, day periods should have their own format codes. But the number of day periods varies across languages (not really between distinct scripts of the same language), but more importantly also across gerographic regions/countries/territories (more than by language). CLDR would then need more regional variants than those supported for now (ISO 3166-1 codes may not be sufficient as BCP 47 language subtags ) 2018-03-02 15:22 GMT+01:00 Christoph Päper via Unicode <unic...@unicode.org> : > F'up2: cldr-users@unicode.org > > Doug Ewell via unic...@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 `am` vs. `pm` distinction common in English and > labelled `a` as a placeholder in CLDR formats is too simplistic for some > languages when using the 12-hour clock (which they usually don't in written > language). In German, for instance, you would always use a format with `B` > instead (i.e. "morgens", "mittags", "abends", "nachts" or no identifier > during daylight). > > How and where can I best suggest to change this in CLDR? The B formats > have their own code, e.g. `Bhms` = `h:mm:ss B`. Should I just propose to > set `hms` etc. to the same value next time the Survey Tool is open? > > In my experience, there are too few people reviewing even the "largest" > languages (like German). I participated in v32 and v33, but other than me > there were only contributions from (seemingly) a single employee from each > of Apple, Google and Microsoft. Most improvements or corrections I > suggested just got lost, i.e. nobody discussed or voted on them, so the old > values remained. >
_______________________________________________ CLDR-Users mailing list CLDR-Users@unicode.org http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/cldr-users