https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145853
--- Comment #7 from Yaroslav Serhieiev <[email protected]> --- Hello, Eike Rathke! Thanks for sharing your insights. > That looks wrong, it should be "✓ {sla-Latn-x-isv}" (note the single {} > braces) Indeed, the double {} braces were just my inaccurate memory. Here's the real screenshot: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/909783580903890964/913353621452754974/unknown.png > ICU (International Components for Unicode) provides that with its CLDR > (Common Locale Data Repository), and if a subtag name is missing then the > best place to add it is there. Thanks. I've checked the contents of their latest release, and indeed there are no "art" (Artificial) or "sla" (Slavic collective language group) codes inside. > So, we disallow entering private-use subtags in the combobox... A dictionary > extension however can add such tag. So, is there anything you think can be improved on the LibreOffice source code side, in regards to the third-party dictionary extensions? Or, the other way around, is there any naming convention that an extension can leverage to be rendered as "<unrecognized-iso-code> (Latin) {<private-subtag>}"? I'm trying to understand the next action items from our discussions. > The first mentions Glottolog inte1263 and as IETF code art-x-interslv, so > that should probably be art-Latn-x-interslv and art-Cyrl-x-interslv instead? Hmm, I don't find the ConLang Code Registry's (https://www.kreativekorp.com/clcr/) to be the most authoritative source here, because they nowhere on their site distinguish between constructed and planned (semi-natural) languages here, although they might be right. I am not sure, and this doubt made me post this question today on SO: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70134064/are-bcp-47-collective-language-code-more-suitable-for-zonal-auxiliary-languages If I am lucky, maybe Doug Ewell (related to SIL) might look into this. Getting back to the technical side of the question, won't it be the same? Using "art" or "sla" language code, we'll anyway (probably) be getting the data strings from here: > https://github.com/unicode-org/icu/blob/49dda34fb175240a7724c7e039a270126ff7d900/icu4c/source/data/lang/en.txt If you search in the file, you'll see no mention of neither "art", nor "sla" code. I mean, I don't see any tangible difference if I follow that "art-" suggestion. I'm very grateful for your participation on this issue and I'd be happy to know what can be done in the addition from your or my side. Best regards, Yaroslav. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
