On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 17:50 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote: > Caolán McNamara wrote: > > > c) Where we use "language" and "country" codes in our xml format we add > > a "language-tags" attribute which maps directly to that Variant field. > > As far as I understand that - it means we have to add support for that > attribute into ODF
Yes, to be able to save a document and indicate that some text is written in Inuktitut Syllabics (Canada) at the moment isn't really possible, as the only tags we have are fo:language and fo:country are fo:language="iu" fo=country="CA" would be Inuktitut Latin (Canada), fo:language-tags is the placeholder suggestion I've used in the examples, and in this case would contain fo:language-tags="Cans". > and into our core as well, right? In the real world what happens generally is that these Locales and "iso-strings" are converted into the internal MS based 16bit language id inside our deeper parts of code, so most of our lower code doesn't know about them and converts to/from them through the MsLangId methods. > Sounds like a very nice addition, but also like a lot of work. Easy enough really. An example implementation illustrating the changes is at issue 111066. I guess the most important thing is to raise is that IMO we're painted into a corner and that the Variant field is a valuable "out" as a practically undefined field that could have semantics attached to it to get out of the trap. C. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
