Re: New team for Iranian Azerbaijani (az_IR)

[Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh farsiweb info>]

On Sat, 2004-09-11 at 18:41, Pablo Saratxaga wrote:
> The question is what should happen when a proper translation is missing?

The user should define what he wants to see using the distribution's
configurations (like the LANG and LANGUAGE environment variables or
software that sets them). Some user may prefer to see Swedish instead,
another Persian, while some other Azerbaijani in Latin (which will most
probably use a different technical vocabulary than the Azerbaijani in
Arabic, so may be confusing).

It's really the user's choice, and then the distribution makers. If I
was making a distribution for the Iranian market and a user wants
Azerbaijani, I will set the variable to something like "az_IR:fa:en"
instead of "az_IR:az_AZ:en" or "az_IR:en".

> Now, in the hypothetical case were Persian in latin script were used
> somewhere and translations existed for it; and in the hypotetical case
> that a translation in Persian in arabic script was missing but existed
> in Persian in latin script; would you prefer to see the text
> untranslated, in English, or see it an a latin script rendition of your
> language?

It's not me that is important. But I, personally, would have preferred
to see English in that hypothetical situation. But the general users?
They should be polled.

> The script is not the issue here; both choices are in latin script,
> the question is wheter you prefer a foreign language in its normal
> writting system; or your own language in a somewhat unusual (from the
> point of vue of the user) writting system?

We may be asking the wrong question here. We should not decide for the
user, she should decide for herself. The default, should be the same for
every possible language (like proper naming of locales, and fallback to
English) to make things more predictable.

roozbeh