David Wright (HE12025-12-27): > I'm aware of that. You wrote "Nowadays, I would say most system have > most standard locales installed": I interpreted "installed" as those > chosen from the list and compiled, rather than all the list entries.
I did. Most people do never see that list. Also, the fact that locales needs to be “compiled” and it takes so much time is silly. > It might help those not knowing the name of the "normal" papersize for > a particular country. I have already answered to that: > > Indeed, but what you describe is a job for a tool for easy system > > configuration: tell it the country, and it will fill-in the various > > settings. > It can make the scheme more extensible: keywords > could be added for, say, envelope or book sizes that vary territorially. Making a stupid system more extensible only creates an extensible stupid system. > Using the paper name itself could lead to ambiguities when the same > name is used in some countries for paper of a different size. Practical examples? > If that bugs you, again, you might write a variant so you can have both > fr_FR@mypaper and fr_FR@isotimedate, or whatever. Sigh. The fact that it needs to be fixed is hardly proof that the system is good. Quite the opposite, in fact. What is your point? -- Nicolas George
