Re: More info about #228486 / #235759
Jens Nachtigall wrote:
> > a) Use english doublequotes
> > - the opening quote sign should be subscripted
> > - opening/closing are identical, this makes nested quotes hard to
> > read
> > b) Use guillemots
> > - guillemots are very unusual in Germany (In printing I remember
> > only a few occurences in ~1900 vintage books, and none in
> > contemporary literature)
> That is by no means right. I don't know what kind of books you read, but
> if I take a random look at my library, I get these books with »« :
> * »Die Hebammen-Sprechstunde« (book about getting children) -> 2002
> * »Perspektivenübernahme und soziales Handeln« (social studies) -> 1982
> * »Die Lust am Schauen« (social studies) -> 1986
> * »Zope« (computer science) -> 2004
> There are also some books with U201E and U201C, however, these are the
Well, as said, my impression is a different one, especially WRT periodic
> Regardless from personal impressions of what's the most often used case,
> Duden (the German authority for orthography) recognizes both as valid.
> > So a) is IMHO the best.
> This would be a consense until there is no special Swiss translation.
I have to raise another point:
If guillemots are actually in such wide use, we should IMHO avoid to map
german quotes to guillemots. They may be used in different contexts at
the same time, or for nested quotes.
> The big problem is that ,, and " is the something absolutely never being
> used. If U201E and U201C is not available, people use »...« or "...".
> Nobody would ever think of replacing U201E and U201C with ,, and ". Do
> you agree (I only ask to let gotom here your opinion on this)?
Well, I, personally, use "...", and I think it's the most legible style.
The human eye/brain does pattern matching, so the correct shape is more
important than orientation ('ä' vs. 'a:' works surprisingly well),
which in turn is more important than the position (subscript vs.
> > The last drawback for any change is that it will AFAICS be a
> > long-term deviation from upstream glibc. I believe upstream had
> > already made the decision to stay with c) until utf-8 is found
> > everywhere.
> you "believe"? Can you give any pointers? I think, upstream will also
> change this as soon as someone knowing the German language and its
> habits will have a look at it.
The upstream lead developer is german, he wrote the original
transliteration, and he's well known to have strong opinions.
I think it is unlikely that he will change his mind.