[PATCH] en_CA, es_AR, es_ES: Define yesstr and nostr.

[Keld Simonsen]

On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:02:06PM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:
>   Hi!
> 
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 12:05:57PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > My feeling is that this is positive progress on missing data.
> > 
> > Comments?
> 
>   I think it's fine, Acked-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@ucw.cz>.
> 
>   Thank you for the verbose comments. :-)
> 
>   (Though I'm not particularly fond of having the ASCII contents of the
> datapoint sequence repeated in the comment, as all data duplication adds
> a potential for inconsistencies. Ideally, we would just actually write
> the characters right in the values instead of the codepoints; I didn't
> find any technical reason why to insist on the <U...> syntax for all
> characters. But then again, I'm personally unlikely to gather the
> momentum to do such a change, mainly to verify that it really is 100%
> safe.)

The locales are character set independent, so they will run with utf-8, iso-8859-1, iso-8859-15
and even EBCDIC. They are written in ASCII only, to better the portability between systems with
different character sets.

Originally I wrote many locales using some mnemonic scheme, that
made them easier to read, such as <A> for <U0041>, <B> for <U0042>, <b> for <U0062> etc,
but Ulrich Drepper did not like that and recoded all the locales to use the <Uxxxx> notation.
Some of the mnemonics were a bit complex, but IMHO they were far easier to
proofread than the <Uxxxx> notation, and some came directly from the POSIX standard.
They were documented in the POSIX.2 standard from 1992, and also in TR 14652.

Best regards
Keld