Anne van Kesteren
July 15, 2013
1:37 PM
FWIW,
exposing a new API because another API is broken in a particularimplementation
is a known anti-pattern. We should fix problems at thesource.
Good point, but I believe that there are more potential sources of
language tags
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Andy Earnshaw wrote:
navigator.language isn't part of any stable specification
It's part of the HTML standard:
http://whatwg.org/html/#language-preferences
...which is very stable at this point (there's basically no way that part
of the spec can change in an
As for LookupAvailableLocales, there might be a problem with Zbigniew's
vision of it as any tags would be returned without extensions. I'm not sure
if this is something that we'd need to worry about, though.
No, that's good, because locales will be stored under names without them as
well.
Would you expect to support the same locales as Intl constructors in your
library? Can you safely make that assumption?
Canonicalisation makes sense because I would expect a library to
canonicalise the tag and then try and load the file containing relevant
data whether the native API supports it
- Original Message -
Would you expect to support the same locales as Intl constructors in your
library?
Yes.
Can you safely make that assumption?
I'd have to think more about edge cases, but my initial reaction is - yes.
Canonicalisation makes sense because I would expect a
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Andy Earnshaw andyearns...@gmail.com wrote:
I certainly do, at least for Canonicalize-. I've come across one user agent
that returns `navigator.language` in non-canonical form which presented a
small problem for data I had stored with canonical file names.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Andy Earnshaw andyearns...@gmail.com
wrote:
I certainly do, at least for Canonicalize-. I've come across one user
agent
that returns `navigator.language` in non-canonical form which
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Andy Earnshaw andyearns...@gmail.com wrote:
navigator.language isn't part of any stable specification, and even the
current HTML 5.1 draft doesn't specify that tags should be returned in
canonical form. Do you think it would be a good idea to raise an issue for
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Norbert Lindenberg
ecmascr...@lindenbergsoftware.com wrote:
CanonicalizeLanguageTag isn't even defined for non-structurally valid
language tags. That's why I meant a combined IsStructurallyValidLanguageTag
+ CanonicalizeLanguageTag function is more useful
Sorry g, forgot the Cc :-)
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Zbigniew Braniecki zbranie...@mozilla.com
wrote:
...
1) CanonicalizeLanguageTag [1]
Because language tags come from developers and users, ability to
canonicalize them is crucial to us. ECMA 402 specifies this function and
all
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Zbigniew Braniecki zbraniecki at mozilla.com
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
/ wrote:
[...]
//
/1) CanonicalizeLanguageTag [1]
/
// Because language tags come from developers and users, ability to
// canonicalize them is crucial to us. ECMA 402
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 1:05 PM, André Bargull andre.barg...@udo.eduwrote:
...
Only exposing CanonicalizeLanguageTag does not seem useful to me without
having access to IsStructurallyValidLanguageTag. Most likely a combined
IsStructurallyValidLanguageTag + CanonicalizeLanguageTag function is
On 7/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andy Earnshaw wrote:
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 1:05 PM, André Bargull andre.barg...@udo.edu
mailto:andre.barg...@udo.edu wrote:
...
Only exposing CanonicalizeLanguageTag does not seem useful to me
without having access to IsStructurallyValidLanguageTag. Most
On Jul 13, 2013, at 12:37 , André Bargull andre.barg...@udo.edu wrote:
On 7/13/2013 8:48 PM, Andy Earnshaw wrote:
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 1:05 PM, André Bargull andre.barg...@udo.edu
mailto:andre.barg...@udo.edu wrote:
Only exposing CanonicalizeLanguageTag does not seem useful to me
Hi all,
Currently, ECMA 402 specifies a pretty nice language negotiation
algorithm... and keeps it private.
While working on l10n frameworks, we need to be able to negotiate
between at least two parties - application and user preferences, in the
very same way I18n API does, so if we could
15 matches
Mail list logo
