This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Locales: Use CLDR matching thousands separator
- From: Marko Myllynen <myllynen at redhat dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Rafal Luzynski <digitalfreak at lingonborough dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 15:15:20 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Locales: Use CLDR matching thousands separator
- References: <eb1814b5-cae3-8472-ece6-44bec12d570b@redhat.com> <a2a29fbe-6872-c123-d4d0-2b8664825e72@redhat.com> <1786676151.161483.1534532463077@poczta.nazwa.pl> <9848a4de-2b6e-895b-d601-1358b79ef9f9@redhat.com> <22ed1815-c4c0-bb99-56fd-03a2f79c501d@redhat.com> <1406180089.857282.1545090221680@poczta.nazwa.pl> <8736qv42q5.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Marko Myllynen <myllynen at redhat dot com>
Hi Florian,
On 18/12/2018 11.13, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Rafal Luzynski:
>
>> It looks to me they are going to accept NNBSP but definitely, if they
>> say that they want to stick with NBSP or they decide to stop working
>> on the issue then we will have to switch to NBSP.
>
> To me it would suggest that we should re-evaluate CLDR as a data source.
Care to elaborate a bit? Do you mean that should CLDR decide using NBSP
then glibc should reconsider using CLDR as a data source in this
particular case or in general? Wouldn't it be beneficial to follow CLDR
regardless of their choice of NBSP or NNBSP?
Thanks,
--
Marko Myllynen