I am 100% for something like :en or 'en' for the default locale. I
don't use 'cz-CS' in my locales either, just 'cz'.

Using 'en-US' has *only* academical benefits in my eyes. It's not
pragmatic.

Karel

On Nov 14, 8:04 am, "Yaroslav Markin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Maybe making some kind of fallback would be a 
> solution?http://www.unicode.org/cldr/data/charts/summary/root.html
>
> http://www.unicode.org/cldr/data/charts/summary/en.html
>
> It may be the same kind of language, but we may need different locales for
> translation. The only thing wrong with current en-US approach
> is trouble with using locale name in routes, I think.
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Sven Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I stumble across this bit every time I start doing something "real"
> > with Rails I18n and this makes me think.
>
> > For Rails we've picked the default locale :"en-US" because we've
> > thought it'd be the most defensive claim to make. Nobody could really
> > argue for picking anything else because this is in fact the locale to
> > which Rails always (implicitely) was localized.
>
> > But it is also artificial in that Rails I18n itself does not support
> > locale fallbacks (e.g. looking up :en when :"en-US" is not available)
> > so when we work with only Rails we either have to use en-US literally
> > as a locale or somehow map it manually. (E.g. when one wants to use a
> > route like /en/:ressource one needs to map :en to :en-US so that Rails
> > can find its own translations. How cumbersome.)
>
> > I guess way more than 80% of all applications will be perfectly happy
> > with only supporting language locales and ignoring the country/region
> > tag (like :en, :fr, :es, :de, ...).
>
> > So my feeling is that we should change the Rails default locale
> > from :"en-US" to just :en as long as it is still possible.
>
> > That might expose us to arguments that we implicitely define English
> > as American English but on the one hand I'd say that the gained
> > simplicity and convenience outweighs this and on the other hand we
> > might argue that Rails actually always implicitely already did that.
>
> > WDYT?
>
> --
> Yaroslav Markin
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"rails-i18n" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rails-i18n?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to