Thanks to Rimas and Christian for clearing this up. I didn't look farther than the users list on the page I found.
On Mar 4, 2011, at 16:45 , Rimas Kudelis wrote: > Hi James, > > 2011.03.04 17:37, James Wilde rašė: >> On Mar 4, 2011, at 16:16 , Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:05 PM, James Wilde<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Additionally, and just to add to the confusion, the list is indexed as >>>> ZH-HAN in the list of local lists. >>> Do you have a URL at hand? If it is listed as chinese, then it is a >>> mistake, as it is not chinese. - ant it should be hans and hant - not >>> just "han" >> You're right, it is hans. Or rather, zh-hans, and I have always associated >> zh with different forms of Chinese. The information is in Chinese. >> >> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/zh-hans > > zh-Hans is the code for *simplified* Chinese, unlike zh-CN, which is > technically a code for Chinese *as spoken in China*. It's a subtle > difference, and Hans/Hant codes are relatively new, and not as popular as the > legacy zh-CN and zh-TW codes. So are we going to see more of zh-hans and zh-hant in the world (not just at LibO and TDF) as new abbreviations for simplified and traditional Chinese? And BTW, having now seen the explanation, it would appear that the han part of hans and hant is indeed a reference to the han Chinese. //James -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
