Bug#1013946: lintian: wrongly report unknown-locale-code ber
Hi,
one more comment:
Russ Allbery wrote:
> I worked out the same thing, and I'm fairly sure that means that this is
> not a valid locale. It's the code for the Berber language *group*, and
> the individual members of that group have their own 639-3 codes, so that
> seems to imply to me that those translations were tagged with the wrong
> code.
So I wondered what they should actually be tagged as. "Judeo-Berber"
is the only language with the string "berber" I found in ISO 639-3.
Unfortunately I found no mapping between ISO 639-2/-5 language groups
and actual languages in ISO 639-3 — in neither of JSON files for these
three parts.
So I dug around in Wikipedia and figured out that Judeo-Berber is a
"Non-Zenati Northern Berber language". And it using the Hebrew
alphabet seems to be a unique characteristic. Which again seems rather
specific and if it's a Berber language and hasn't Hebrew letters, it's
likely not Judeo-Berber.
Given https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Linguistic_Diagram_Berber.png
(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_languages) there are tons
of possible languages gathered under "Berber languages", so the longer
the more I tend to agree with Russ' arguments to stay with ISO 639-3
only.
Plus maybe add a few more notes to the tag description to explain why
language groups are probably no good idea for locales.
Still would be happy about input from Toddy on this. :-)
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <abe@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
Reply to: