[v2,1/2] Documentation: Start translations to Spanish

  Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
effort.

Signed-off-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>
---
 Documentation/translations/index.rst          |  1 +
 .../translations/sp_SP/disclaimer-sp.rst      |  6 ++
 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/index.rst    | 72 +++++++++++++++++++
 MAINTAINERS                                   |  5 ++
 4 files changed, 84 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/disclaimer-sp.rst
 create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/index.rst
  

Hi Carlos,

Since you Cc'd me, I guess I can give a quick review. :)

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 4:40 PM Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> wrote:
>
> +=======================
> +Traducción al español
> +=======================

I think these should be as long as the title.

> +La propagación simultanea de la traducción de una modificación en

"simultánea"

> +esté actualizada con las ultimas modificaciones. Si lo que lee en una

"últimas"

> +Una traducción no es una * bifurcación * de la documentación oficial, por

I am not sure if the spaces are needed.

> +ejemplo, nuevas traducciones, actualizaciones, correcciones).

"...", "etc." or "o"/"y" before  "correcciones"?

> +Las traducciones tratan de ser lo más precisas posible pero no es posible
> +convertir directamente un idioma a otro. Cada idioma tiene su propia
> +gramática, y una cultura tras ella, por lo tanto, la traducción de una
> +oración al inglés se podría modificar para adaptarlo al español. Por esta

"adaptarla"? (if you are referring to "la traducción" or "una oración")

> +la forma, pero todavía transmiten el mensaje original. A pesar de la gran
> +difusión del inglés en el idioma hablado, cuando sea posible, expresiones
> +en inglés serán reemplazadas por las palabras correspondientes en español.

I think the sentence wants to say it is common (in the community?) to
use English, but terms will be translated where possible. However, I
am not sure what "en el idioma hablado" means here.

Also, was this based on the English version or another translation?
i.e. this sentence does not seem to be in the English one.

> +sientan mas cómodos. En principio, estas pequeñas diferencias no deberían

"más"

> +La documentación del kernel de Linux
> +====================================

I think without the last "de" would be more precise, but I have heard
it this way too.

> +bienvenidas; de modo que, si desea ayudar, únase a la lista de correo de
> +linux-doc en vger.kernel.org.

Ditto.

Cheers,
Miguel
  

On 10/14/22 10:21, Miguel Ojeda wrote:

> Hi Carlos,
>
> Since you Cc'd me, I guess I can give a quick review. :)
Thanks Miguel. You came to mind immediately when thinking about CCing
someone else that's a native speaker.
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 4:40 PM Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> wrote:
>> +=======================
>> +Traducción al español
>> +=======================
> I think these should be as long as the title.
>
>> +La propagación simultanea de la traducción de una modificación en
> "simultánea"
>
>> +esté actualizada con las ultimas modificaciones. Si lo que lee en una
> "últimas"
>
>> +Una traducción no es una * bifurcación * de la documentación oficial, por
> I am not sure if the spaces are needed.
>
>> +ejemplo, nuevas traducciones, actualizaciones, correcciones).
> "...", "etc." or "o"/"y" before  "correcciones"?
>
>> +Las traducciones tratan de ser lo más precisas posible pero no es posible
>> +convertir directamente un idioma a otro. Cada idioma tiene su propia
>> +gramática, y una cultura tras ella, por lo tanto, la traducción de una
>> +oración al inglés se podría modificar para adaptarlo al español. Por esta
> "adaptarla"? (if you are referring to "la traducción" or "una oración")
>
>> +la forma, pero todavía transmiten el mensaje original. A pesar de la gran
>> +difusión del inglés en el idioma hablado, cuando sea posible, expresiones
>> +en inglés serán reemplazadas por las palabras correspondientes en español.
> I think the sentence wants to say it is common (in the community?) to
> use English, but terms will be translated where possible. However, I
> am not sure what "en el idioma hablado" means here.
>
> Also, was this based on the English version or another translation?
> i.e. this sentence does not seem to be in the English one.
Yep, I took this from the Italian translation. They added:

"Nonostante la grande diffusione di inglesismi nella lingua parlata, quando
possibile, questi verranno sostituiti dalle corrispettive parole italiane"

which in English is (more less):

"Despite the popularity of English language in our field, use the
corresponding term in Italian when possible."

I believe the idea is that, even though we inherited English terms, like
"bug", we should try to translate as much as possible and don't fall into
what people sometimes refer to "Spanenglish", mixing both languages.
>
>> +sientan mas cómodos. En principio, estas pequeñas diferencias no deberían
> "más"
>
>> +La documentación del kernel de Linux
>> +====================================
> I think without the last "de" would be more precise, but I have heard
> it this way too.
>
>> +bienvenidas; de modo que, si desea ayudar, únase a la lista de correo de
>> +linux-doc en vger.kernel.org.
> Ditto.
Thanks for your feedback, Miguel. I will wait to see if John has anything
to add before I share updated patches.
>
> Cheers,
> Miguel

Best regards,

Carlos
  

Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> writes:

> Thanks for your feedback, Miguel. I will wait to see if John has anything
> to add before I share updated patches.

I am, alas, not well qualified to judge a Spanish translation (leggo
facilmente quello italiano, invece :), so I don't have anything to add
there.

There's no hurry in any case, I'll not apply this before the merge
window closes.

Thanks,

jon
  

On 10/14/22 10:36, Jonathan Corbet wrote:

> Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> writes:
>
>> Thanks for your feedback, Miguel. I will wait to see if John has anything
>> to add before I share updated patches.
> I am, alas, not well qualified to judge a Spanish translation (leggo
> facilmente quello italiano, invece :), so I don't have anything to add
> there.
>
> There's no hurry in any case, I'll not apply this before the merge
> window closes.
Sounds good! In that case, I will wait a week to resend, to also give time
for more potential feedback.
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon

Thanks,

Carlos
  

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 5:33 PM Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Miguel. You came to mind immediately when thinking about CCing
> someone else that's a native speaker.

My pleasure!

> I believe the idea is that, even though we inherited English terms, like
> "bug", we should try to translate as much as possible and don't fall into
> what people sometimes refer to "Spanenglish", mixing both languages.

Yeah, that was what I was thinking. Personally, I think translating
common words like "bug" is fine, but more technical ones like
"spinlock" may make things harder later when the reader goes into the
source code or English docs.

Thanks!

I forgot, by the way: with the typos I mentioned fixed, it looks fine to me:

    Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>

Cheers,
Miguel
  

Hi,
Minor nit on language code.

On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:24:53 -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
> sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
> prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
> effort.
IIUC, the language code for "Spanish (Spain)" should be "es-ES", as is
listed at e.g., http://www.lingoes.net/en/translator/langcode.htm.

The other translations use directory names found in the table, with
"-" replaced with "_".  It would be better to be consistent.

Just my two cents.

        Thanks, Akira

> 
> Signed-off-by: Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/translations/index.rst          |  1 +
>  .../translations/sp_SP/disclaimer-sp.rst      |  6 ++
>  Documentation/translations/sp_SP/index.rst    | 72 +++++++++++++++++++
>  MAINTAINERS                                   |  5 ++
>  4 files changed, 84 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/disclaimer-sp.rst
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/translations/sp_SP/index.rst
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/translations/index.rst b/Documentation/translations/index.rst
> index 1175a47d07f0..b826c34791c0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/translations/index.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/translations/index.rst
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ Translations
>     it_IT/index
>     ko_KR/index
>     ja_JP/index
> +   sp_SP/index
>  
>
  

On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 01:06:36PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> Hi,
> Minor nit on language code.
> 
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:24:53 -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> > Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
> > sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
> > prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
> > effort.
> IIUC, the language code for "Spanish (Spain)" should be "es-ES", as is
> listed at e.g., http://www.lingoes.net/en/translator/langcode.htm.
> 
> The other translations use directory names found in the table, with
> "-" replaced with "_".  It would be better to be consistent.

I don't know what standard we're actually following.  RFC5646 suggests
simply using "es", with "es-419" for Latin America specialisation or
"es-ES" for Spain.  I don't know how much variation there is between
different Spanish dialects for technical documents; as I understand it,
it's worth supporting two dialects of Chinese, but we merrily mix &
match en_US and en_GB spellings.  Similarly, I wouldn't suggest that we
have separate translations for fr_CA, fr_CH, fr_FR, just a single 'fr'
would be fine.

We do need to be careful here; people are rightfully sensitive about
being incorrectly grouped together.  If possible we should find a
standard to follow that's been defined by experts in these matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IETF_language_tag may be a good place to
start looking.
  

On 2022/10/17 23:41, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 01:06:36PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Minor nit on language code.
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:24:53 -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
>>> Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
>>> sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
>>> prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
>>> effort.
>> IIUC, the language code for "Spanish (Spain)" should be "es-ES", as is
>> listed at e.g., http://www.lingoes.net/en/translator/langcode.htm.
>>
>> The other translations use directory names found in the table, with
>> "-" replaced with "_".  It would be better to be consistent.
> 
> I don't know what standard we're actually following.  RFC5646 suggests
> simply using "es", with "es-419" for Latin America specialisation or
> "es-ES" for Spain.  I don't know how much variation there is between
> different Spanish dialects for technical documents; as I understand it,
> it's worth supporting two dialects of Chinese, but we merrily mix &
> match en_US and en_GB spellings.  Similarly, I wouldn't suggest that we
> have separate translations for fr_CA, fr_CH, fr_FR, just a single 'fr'
> would be fine.
> 
> We do need to be careful here; people are rightfully sensitive about
> being incorrectly grouped together.  If possible we should find a
> standard to follow that's been defined by experts in these matters.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IETF_language_tag may be a good place to
> start looking.

I think generic "es" is OK, especially if "es_ES" can have such a
negative connotation to some. I just wanted to point out "sp_SP"
looks wrong.

Carlos, if you go the "es" way, it would be better to mention the
reason of the choice in the Changelog for future reference.

Subdirectories "ja_JP", "ko_KR", and "zh_CN" were added under
Documentation/ way back in 2007 (v2.6.23).

As you might see, two of the three language codes needed region
distinction and they were reasonable choices at the time.

        Thanks, Akira
  

On 10/17/22 21:36, Akira Yokosawa wrote:

> On 2022/10/17 23:41, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 01:06:36PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Minor nit on language code.
>>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:24:53 -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
>>>> Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
>>>> sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
>>>> prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
>>>> effort.
>>> IIUC, the language code for "Spanish (Spain)" should be "es-ES", as is
>>> listed at e.g., https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lingoes.net%2Fen%2Ftranslator%2Flangcode.htm&data=05%7C01%7Ccarlos.bilbao%40amd.com%7C44c226d534f44b4afc1f08dab0b1893b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638016573808784843%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=bTm9yjEtum2LkTFkN1kZphytfVKN9Si2Ypk7j6s%2FaVw%3D&reserved=0.
>>>
>>> The other translations use directory names found in the table, with
>>> "-" replaced with "_".  It would be better to be consistent.
>> I don't know what standard we're actually following.  RFC5646 suggests
>> simply using "es", with "es-419" for Latin America specialisation or
>> "es-ES" for Spain.  I don't know how much variation there is between
>> different Spanish dialects for technical documents; as I understand it,
>> it's worth supporting two dialects of Chinese, but we merrily mix &
>> match en_US and en_GB spellings.  Similarly, I wouldn't suggest that we
>> have separate translations for fr_CA, fr_CH, fr_FR, just a single 'fr'
>> would be fine.
>>
>> We do need to be careful here; people are rightfully sensitive about
>> being incorrectly grouped together.  If possible we should find a
>> standard to follow that's been defined by experts in these matters.
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIETF_language_tag&data=05%7C01%7Ccarlos.bilbao%40amd.com%7C44c226d534f44b4afc1f08dab0b1893b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638016573808784843%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3T9bPQzcj9hEuZiPkjIU%2BPCEaxAivgaNKZ2gL5m3OQA%3D&reserved=0 may be a good place to
>> start looking.
> I think generic "es" is OK, especially if "es_ES" can have such a
> negative connotation to some. I just wanted to point out "sp_SP"
> looks wrong.
>
> Carlos, if you go the "es" way, it would be better to mention the
> reason of the choice in the Changelog for future reference.
>
> Subdirectories "ja_JP", "ko_KR", and "zh_CN" were added under
> Documentation/ way back in 2007 (v2.6.23).
>
> As you might see, two of the three language codes needed region
> distinction and they were reasonable choices at the time.
>
>          Thanks, Akira

Answering to Akira and Matthew below. Thanks to both for valuable feedback.

I made the conscious choice of not using es_ES, because as mentioned, it
references a standard that I don’t intend to follow myself or enforce on
Spanish translations. es_ES is a standard that comes from “Esp”-aña (Spain,
the country) whereas “sp_SP” is as in "Sp"-anish, the language, not the
country. Regarding this, I took the liberty of adding an extra paragraph to
index.rs. I would translate it to English like:

"Many countries speak Spanish, each one with its own culture, expressions,
and sometimes significant grammatical differences. The translators are free
to use the version of Spanish which they are most comfortable with. In
principle, these small differences should not pose a great barrier for
speakers of different versions of Spanish, albeit in case of doubt, you can
ask the maintainers."

I also opted for not using es_ES due to its geographical connotations. If
someone from Peru, Mexico, Argentina, … submits a translation tomorrow, I
would review it and we would understand each other just fine. Even within
“Spain” there are many dialects and things change within regions. I
reiterate that all dialects should be allowed in this directory.

Fortunately for us, versions of Spanish differ much more in spoken form
than they do when written. This does not happen between traditional and
simplified Chinese.

On top of everything else, using locale es_ES may imply that spell checks
on that directory using the locale es_ES would be clean, but this is very
far from reality, among other things, because all the English terms we
inherit regarding computers. As Miguel Ojeda pointed out somewhere in this
thread, there are terms that is better if we do not translate, to favor
understanding of code/other documents.

I will update the corresponding commit message to clarify why we are using
es_ES format in this particular case.

Best regards,
Carlos
  

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 08:40:42AM -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> > > I don't know what standard we're actually following.  RFC5646 suggests
> > > simply using "es", with "es-419" for Latin America specialisation or
> > > "es-ES" for Spain.  I don't know how much variation there is between
> > > different Spanish dialects for technical documents; as I understand it,
> > > it's worth supporting two dialects of Chinese, but we merrily mix &
> > > match en_US and en_GB spellings.  Similarly, I wouldn't suggest that we
> > > have separate translations for fr_CA, fr_CH, fr_FR, just a single 'fr'
> > > would be fine.
> > > 
> > > We do need to be careful here; people are rightfully sensitive about
> > > being incorrectly grouped together.  If possible we should find a
> > > standard to follow that's been defined by experts in these matters.
> > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIETF_language_tag&data=05%7C01%7Ccarlos.bilbao%40amd.com%7C44c226d534f44b4afc1f08dab0b1893b%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C638016573808784843%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3T9bPQzcj9hEuZiPkjIU%2BPCEaxAivgaNKZ2gL5m3OQA%3D&reserved=0 may be a good place to
> > > start looking.
> > I think generic "es" is OK, especially if "es_ES" can have such a
> > negative connotation to some. I just wanted to point out "sp_SP"
> > looks wrong.
> > 
> > Carlos, if you go the "es" way, it would be better to mention the
> > reason of the choice in the Changelog for future reference.
> > 
> > Subdirectories "ja_JP", "ko_KR", and "zh_CN" were added under
> > Documentation/ way back in 2007 (v2.6.23).
> > 
> > As you might see, two of the three language codes needed region
> > distinction and they were reasonable choices at the time.
> > 
> >          Thanks, Akira
> 
> Answering to Akira and Matthew below. Thanks to both for valuable feedback.
> 
> I made the conscious choice of not using es_ES, because as mentioned, it
> references a standard that I don’t intend to follow myself or enforce on
> Spanish translations. es_ES is a standard that comes from “Esp”-aña (Spain,
> the country) whereas “sp_SP” is as in "Sp"-anish, the language, not the
> country. Regarding this, I took the liberty of adding an extra paragraph to
> index.rs. I would translate it to English like:
> 
> "Many countries speak Spanish, each one with its own culture, expressions,
> and sometimes significant grammatical differences. The translators are free
> to use the version of Spanish which they are most comfortable with. In
> principle, these small differences should not pose a great barrier for
> speakers of different versions of Spanish, albeit in case of doubt, you can
> ask the maintainers."
> 
> I also opted for not using es_ES due to its geographical connotations. If
> someone from Peru, Mexico, Argentina, … submits a translation tomorrow, I
> would review it and we would understand each other just fine. Even within
> “Spain” there are many dialects and things change within regions. I
> reiterate that all dialects should be allowed in this directory.
> 
> Fortunately for us, versions of Spanish differ much more in spoken form
> than they do when written. This does not happen between traditional and
> simplified Chinese.
> 
> On top of everything else, using locale es_ES may imply that spell checks
> on that directory using the locale es_ES would be clean, but this is very
> far from reality, among other things, because all the English terms we
> inherit regarding computers. As Miguel Ojeda pointed out somewhere in this
> thread, there are terms that is better if we do not translate, to favor
> understanding of code/other documents.
> 
> I will update the corresponding commit message to clarify why we are using
> es_ES format in this particular case.

I think we're better off following BCP 47:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
"zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
zh-CN and zh-TW.

I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
as we do all dialects of English.

Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
we've been using up to now?
  

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 3:40 PM Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com> wrote:
>
> Fortunately for us, versions of Spanish differ much more in spoken form
> than they do when written.

Agreed: in Spanish, the differences, in particular in formal/technical
texts, are very minor.

Cheers,
Miguel
  

[Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:

> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
> zh-CN and zh-TW.
>
> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
> as we do all dialects of English.
>
> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
> we've been using up to now?

I want to go hide somewhere :)

I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.

Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
"Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
other scripts.

If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
translation maintainers think?

Thanks,

jon
  

Resending without the screwy address that my mailer decided to put in
for Alex, sorry for the noise.

Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes:

> [Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]
>
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
>
>> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
>> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
>> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
>> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
>> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
>> zh-CN and zh-TW.
>>
>> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
>> as we do all dialects of English.
>>
>> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
>> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
>> we've been using up to now?
>
> I want to go hide somewhere :)
>
> I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
> is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
> could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.
>
> Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
> "Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
> there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
> with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
> other scripts.
>
> If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
> things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
> strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
> can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
> translation maintainers think?
>
> Thanks,
>
> jon
  

On 10/24/22 10:31, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Resending without the screwy address that my mailer decided to put in
> for Alex, sorry for the noise.
>
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes:
>
>> [Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]
>>
>> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
>>
>>> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
>>> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
>>> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
>>> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
>>> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
>>> zh-CN and zh-TW.
>>>
>>> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
>>> as we do all dialects of English.
>>>
>>> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
>>> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
>>> we've been using up to now?
>> I want to go hide somewhere :)
>>
>> I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
>> is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
>> could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.
>>
>> Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
>> "Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
>> there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
>> with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
>> other scripts.
>>
>> If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
>> things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
>> strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
>> can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
>> translation maintainers think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> jon

 From the perspective of the target audience (someone that wants to read
translated documentation) the name of the directories do not make any
difference; index.rst lists them in human readable format (e.g. "Traduzione
italiana").

It would make sense renaming if there was confusion among developers, but
there isn't.

For these reasons, and for the obvious inconvenience of renaming things back
and forth, I would say do not worry about it, Jon.

Thanks,
Carlos
  

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 11:31 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
>
>
> Resending without the screwy address that my mailer decided to put in
> for Alex, sorry for the noise.

Thanks for having me.
I am neutral about the change, and prefer less churn for code.
But if we have to, zh_hant/hans is better then CN and TW to comfort
other regions, like zh_SG, zh_HK etc.

Thanks
Alex

>
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes:
>
> > [Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]
> >
> > Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
> >
> >> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
> >> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
> >> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
> >> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
> >> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
> >> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
> >> zh-CN and zh-TW.
> >>
> >> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
> >> as we do all dialects of English.
> >>
> >> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
> >> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
> >> we've been using up to now?
> >
> > I want to go hide somewhere :)
> >
> > I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
> > is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
> > could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.
> >
> > Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
> > "Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
> > there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
> > with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
> > other scripts.
> >
> > If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
> > things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
> > strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
> > can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
> > translation maintainers think?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > jon
  

在 2022/10/25 19:05, Alex Shi 写道:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 11:31 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
>>
>> Resending without the screwy address that my mailer decided to put in
>> for Alex, sorry for the noise.
> Thanks for having me.
> I am neutral about the change, and prefer less churn for code.
> But if we have to, zh_hant/hans is better then CN and TW to comfort
> other regions, like zh_SG, zh_HK etc.

Same here!

 >_<


Thanks,

Yanteng

>
> Thanks
> Alex
>
>> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes:
>>
>>> [Adding some of the other folks interested in translations]
>>>
>>> Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> I think we're better off following BCP 47:
>>>> https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp47 rather than the libc locale format.
>>>> That will imply renaming it_IT to simply "it", ja_JP to "ja" and
>>>> ko_KR to "ko".  The two Chinese translations we have might be called
>>>> "zh-Hant" and "zh-Hans", if the distinction is purely Traditional vs
>>>> Simplified script.  If they really are region based, then they'd be
>>>> zh-CN and zh-TW.
>>>>
>>>> I think you're right to conflate all dialects of Spanish together, just
>>>> as we do all dialects of English.
>>>>
>>>> Jon, this feels like policy you should be setting.  Are you on board
>>>> with this, or do you want to retain the mandatory geography tag that
>>>> we've been using up to now?
>>> I want to go hide somewhere :)
>>>
>>> I'd kind of prefer to avoid renaming the existing translations, as that
>>> is sure to create a certain amount of short-term pain.  But I guess we
>>> could do that if the benefit somehow seems worth it.
>>>
>>> Of course, if we're thrashing things, we could also just call them
>>> "Italian" (or "Italiano"), "Chinese", and so on.  I don't *think*
>>> there's a need for the names to be machine-readable.  We should stick
>>> with ASCII for these names just to help those of us who can't type in
>>> other scripts.
>>>
>>> If asked to set a policy today, my kneejerk reaction would be to leave
>>> things as they are just to avoid a bunch of churn.  But I don't have a
>>> strong opinion on how this naming should actually be done, as long as we
>>> can pick something and be happy with it thereafter.  What do the
>>> translation maintainers think?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> jon