> Those who come from cultures that speak languages descended from older or > different roots might challenge the universality of that proposal.
I strongly object to Sumerian cuneiform. > I don't think there is a correct answer to this. .local has worked, which is > the best we can hope for with whatever name we come up with. If i18n motivates > different names depending on the UI language, that will be a problem. If we > really think that the name shouldn't be in english, which is a position to > which I can certainly relate, it probably shouldn't be a word in any language. That's fine with me. But having different names depending on the locale is an absolutely horrible idea. (What should happen when a Homenet localised for Amharic merges with one that uses Tigrinya? Should the Homenet advertise two zones and duplicate everything within both? Or should it pick one dominant language according to the number of speakers? Please provide working code with your answer.) -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
