Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:16:56 +0200, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote: Intention is clearly explained in bugzilla references. IMO I/II/III is better than sty/lut/mar. For anyone interested: http://karlik.nonlogic.org/blog/wpisy/ogolne/daty-w-glibc-sonda this blog entry refers to two more bug references with discussion. It seems that one of: [DOW], 16 lip 2007 17:00:10 CEST [DOW], 16.07.2007 17:00:10 CEST is going to be used (again). I'd preferred '16.07.2007', as it's contemporary polish notation, however some broken programs report '07.16' and so IMO '16 lip 2007' is the best non-confusing compromise. Fixed-width [DOW] without leading dot is fine either. So if anyone here is interested, please comment in http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4789 or vote. -- Tomasz Pala [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Tuesday 02 of October 2007, Tomasz Pala wrote: So if anyone here is interested, please comment in http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4789 or vote. Voting? Crazy bastards. -- Arkadiusz MiśkiewiczPLD/Linux Team arekm / maven.plhttp://ftp.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 02:52:45PM +0200, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote: IMO 17.II is less misleading. But if you do not agree, talk to glibc-locale First of all - 17.II with dot between them is grammar mistake. Hey! I've found we need to change clock too: http://www.zegarkiclub.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8334sid=7cced6260274a9d3f50628115ccc03b2 apparently most common in Poland is 12h system with roman numbers for hours. -- Tom Pala [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vfmg.sourceforge.net/ http://tccs.sourceforge.net/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
Tomasz Pala wrote: Hey! I've found we need to change clock too: http://www.zegarkiclub.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8334sid=7cced6260274a9d3f50628115ccc03b2 apparently most common in Poland is 12h system with roman numbers for hours. This is definitely wrong list. -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 19 36 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Gdansk University of Technology ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
OK. So I finally checked what date format is commonly used in newest printed sources. It is with roman numbers for months. References: Multimedialna Encyklopedia Brittanica (C) 2006 N. Davies Wyspy, translation (C) 2003 This sources are just the first modern books containing dates inside that I found. BTW, it is not my intention to prove that 17 XII 1999 is the only valid date format in pl. My intension is to prove that the statement claiming it is invalid for 30 years is simply false. -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 19 36 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Gdansk University of Technology ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Tomasz Pala wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:25:50AM +0200, Adam Ryba wrote: XICIIVIM months are archaic in polish. http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-pl/2007-June/141423.html IMHO using roman numerals is plain wrong. First and foremost it is not compliant with polish standard PN-EN 28601:2002 and international standard ISO 8601:2004. Dictionary rules allow use of roman numerals, but it is not obligatory. It just an option. Exactly. There's absolutely no reason to use roman numbers. The most common and proper way is [day].mm. (day10 with or without leading Numeric mm is NOT month name _abbreviayion_. I don't know whether it can be left undefined (en will be used?). zero, two decimal month and four decimal year). However these dictionary rules don't meet PN either. I don't know what was the patch author intention, but thanks god he Intention is clearly explained in bugzilla references. IMO I/II/III is better than sty/lut/mar. But maybe yhey all should have trailing/leading spaces to keep fixed length. -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 19 36 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Gdansk University of Technology ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:16:56AM +0200, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote: Exactly. There's absolutely no reason to use roman numbers. The most common and proper way is [day].mm. (day10 with or without leading Numeric mm is NOT month name _abbreviayion_. Yep. Roman numeric neither. These abbreviations don't exist thus we use numbers. Arabic numbers. Intention is clearly explained in bugzilla references. And it's wrong. IMO I/II/III is better than sty/lut/mar. Roman numbers ARE NOT abbreviations. They are obsoleted form of writing dates in numeric. But maybe yhey all should have trailing/leading spaces to keep fixed length. We should not follow grammar from '70s. -- Tom Pala [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vfmg.sourceforge.net/ http://tccs.sourceforge.net/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
2007/6/22, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Intention is clearly explained in bugzilla references. IMO I/II/III is better than sty/lut/mar. I have no idea, why VII is better and more readable than lip. As for me, shortened names are better. According to http://www.rjp.pl/?mod=krtype=ortsubtype=37id=123 using sty/lut/mar... is acceptable, even if these names are not legal abbreviations (there is no legal and official abbreviation for weekdays and months names). BTW there is a note in bugzilla: With the patch, dates are displayed as: Pn, 6 VIII 1984, 01:23:45 CEST which matches the most common usage. I do not remember last time I saw date with roman numerals. I have checked some legal papers, invoices and magazines... And there were no dates written like this. Is this really most common usage? IMHO this is rare and obsolete. -- Adam 'Pooh' Ryba ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
broken pl LC_TIME
What the f* is that? [EMAIL PROTECTED] /etc]# LC_TIME=pl_PL date Cz, 21 VI 2007, 18:02:04 CEST XICIIVIM months are archaic in polish. -- Tom Pala [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://vfmg.sourceforge.net/ http://tccs.sourceforge.net/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:02:44PM +0200, Tomasz Pala wrote: What the f* is that? [EMAIL PROTECTED] /etc]# LC_TIME=pl_PL date Cz, 21 VI 2007, 18:02:04 CEST XICIIVIM months are archaic in polish. http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-pl/2007-June/141423.html -- Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
Dnia 21-06-2007, Cz o godzinie 19:03 +0200, Jakub Bogusz napisał(a): On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:02:44PM +0200, Tomasz Pala wrote: What the f* is that? [EMAIL PROTECTED] /etc]# LC_TIME=pl_PL date Cz, 21 VI 2007, 18:02:04 CEST XICIIVIM months are archaic in polish. http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-pl/2007-June/141423.html ok, but $ cal czerwiec 2007 N Pn Wt Śr Cz Pt So 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 one letter for Sunday is ... TiweK -- ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Thursday 21 June 2007 22:06, Tomasz Witek wrote: ok, but $ cal czerwiec 2007 N Pn Wt Śr Cz Pt So 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 one letter for Sunday is ... what? we have all days single letter ;) $ LC_ALL= LC_TIME=et_EE cal -m juuni 2007 E T K N R L P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 TiweK -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On 6/21/07, Tomasz Witek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok, but $ cal czerwiec 2007 N Pn Wt Śr Cz Pt So 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 one letter for Sunday is ... ...perfectly normal? Or do you prefer the knights who call Sunday Ni? -- Patryk Zawadzki Generated Content ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:26:00PM +0300, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
On Thursday 21 June 2007 22:06, Tomasz Witek wrote:
ok, but
$ cal
czerwiec 2007
N Pn Wt Śr Cz Pt So
one letter for Sunday is ...
what? we have all days single letter ;)
$ LC_ALL= LC_TIME=et_EE cal -m
juuni 2007
E T K N R L P
and here all week days start by letter 'd', so this:
juny de 2007
dl dt dc dj dv ds dg
1 2 3
should be considered 2 or one letter ? :P
--
Sparky{PI] -- Przemyslaw _ ___ _ _ ... LANG...Pl..Ca..Es..En
/) ___ ___ _ _ || Iskra | | _ \| | | : WWWppcrcd.pld-linux.org
\\| -_)'___| ||^'||//\\//| _/| | | : JID..sparkyatjabberes.org
(/|| (_-_|_|| ||\\ || |_ |_| |_| _| : Mailsparkyatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: broken pl LC_TIME
Tomasz Witek wrote: Dnia 21-06-2007, Cz o godzinie 21:33 +0200, Patryk Zawadzki napisaĹ(a): On 6/21/07, Tomasz Witek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok, but $ cal czerwiec 2007 N Pn Wt Ĺr Cz Pt So 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 one letter for Sunday is ... ...perfectly normal? Or do you prefer the knights who call Sunday Ni? Why if all have two ? Nd ? N or N should solve it. -- === Andrzej M. Krzysztofowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone (48)(58) 347 19 36 Faculty of Applied Phys. Math., Gdansk University of Technology ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
