On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 07:34:01PM +0000, James Troup wrote:
> > > uk is the ISO abbreviation for "United Kingdom", is't it? Why don't
> > > you use the ISO abbreviation for Ukrainia ("ua" or "ukr")?> > Because dictionaries are for *languages*, not for countries, so it's > > natural to use the ISO abbreviation for the language, which is 'uk'? > *blink* who cares? The point is that "uk" is needlessly confusing. Er... so take it up with the ISO standard? Having twenty packages named using a standard aspell-<ll>, and one package named 'aspell-<cc>' seems more confusing to me, particularly if you're a user who *needs* the package in question and consequently are likely to know what the language code is. Are you really suggesting that people are going to look at 'aspell-uk' and think "Oh, good, just what I needed, a dictionary of words specific to Britain"? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
pgpTg9pVlAmiw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
