Hi Mitsuru-san,
Yes, I remember we discussed on this issue before. The reason that LONG
and SHORT names for Japanese era are the same is that CLDR's era names
are not very consistent on length. They have "eraNames", "eraAbbr", and
"eraNarrow" variations. We simply assign LONG to eraNames and SHORT to
eraAbbr in SimpleDateFormat. Possibly the right solution is to provide
"narrow" option in SimpleDateFormat, but it would be breaking the
compatibility (text length of those pattern characters just have two
options, one is 4 or greater (=LONG), and the other is less than 4
(=SHORT)).
So, considering these, I have a couple of options. One is to use the
newer java.time.format APIs which can correctly handle this, or use the
JDK8 locale data by specifying -Djava.locale.providers=COMPAT at runtime.
HTH,
Naoto
On 8/31/17 7:34 PM, Mitsuru Matsushima wrote:
Hi Naoto-san,
The fix looks good, though I'm not a reviewer...
By the way, I may have forgotten to inform you that there exist an issue at the short form of SimpleDateFormat has an issue.
The SimpleDateFormat class is only capable to treat two form, Short and Long.
At JDK9, the CLDR Provider become to default, the provider returns the same
value for the Short form and the Long form.
So, the behavior of SimpleDateFormat is incompatible to previous versions.
(See the Comparison table, I described before.)
---
Mitsuru
-----Original Message-----
From: i18n-dev [mailto:i18n-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Naoto
Sato
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 7:56 AM
To: core-libs-dev <core-libs-...@openjdk.java.net>; i18n-dev
<i18n-dev@openjdk.java.net>
Subject: <i18n dev> [10] RFR 8180469: Wrong short form text for supplemental
Japanese era
Hi,
Please review the fix to the following issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180469
The proposed changeset is located at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8180469/webrev.00/
The problem was caused by the difference of the Era display name for "SHORT"
style between java.time and java.util.Calendar.
Naoto
