https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123466
Eike Rathke <[email protected]> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |[email protected]
--- Comment #13 from Eike Rathke <[email protected]> ---
First, those lt-string assertions do not harm at all (and lt_string_value vs
lt-string.c seems to be a liblangtag version difference). They're just an
indicator for an unresolved (not IANA registered) BCP 47 language tag, which is
kept by LibreOffice though.
Second, MS using 'x-none' that way is non-standard. All 'x-...' language tags
are reserved for *private* use (*private-use subtags by definition are not
interoperable*), but MS doesn't use them so privately if it lets them escape
into the wild and any application encountering them can do whatever it wants,
including completely ignoring them. Unless it wants to follow a private
agreement with the creator (here MS-Word). Is that 'x-none' documented
anywhere?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug._______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
