Re: [PATCH] Fix bo_CN and bo_IN locales

[Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net>]

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:29:37PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:25:54AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> > On 05/13/2013 03:34 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > >bo_CN and bo_IN have an empty name_fmt field, causing localedef to fail:
> > >
> > >$ localedef -c -f UTF-8 -i bo_IN bo_IN.UTF-8
> > >LC_NAME: field `name_fmt' must not be empty
> > >
> > >While I don't know what are the correct values for this locale, I think
> > >this should be fixed, to not break localedef and the tools using it. I
> > >therefore suggest to change the value to "???" as it is already done for
> > >the az_AZ and tt_RU locales.
> > 
> > Yes, this looks like the best approach. I wanted to suggest
> > contacting the authors but there're none given in the file, so go
> > ahead,
> 
> The whole model of LC_NAME is unsuitable to Tibetan names, which are
> not composed of a given and family name, but usually two given names,
> which are meant to be kept in a fixed order (first, second) when both
> used, and it varies from person to person which name they use when
> going by a single name. Thus, the choice of name_fmt depends on how
> the user has coerced Tibetan names into a model that's unsuitable for
> representing them. There does not seem to be any standard for this.
> 
> In a Western or Indian context, the first and second name seem usually
> to be treated as first and last, but this is mildly problematic
> because at least some Tibetans also have family names which were not
> traditionally used as part of a name, but which increasingly many
> people are choosing to adopt when living in places where having a
> family name is expected.
> 
> In a Chinese context, it's a lot more ambiguous whether the first and
> second name will be mapped to (first,family) or (family,first). I've
> seen it done both ways, and I've also seen people's names turned
> backwards because it was originally done one way then rendered the
> opposite.
> 
> In any case, "???" does not seem like a good value for name_fmt. I
> would probably just go with first,family until somebody opens a bug
> report asking for it to be changed...
> 

What is sure is that we can't leave an empty name_fmt, causing tools to
break. If you think "???" is not a good value, could you please provide
a patch that set another non empty value as you suggested above?

-- 
Aurelien Jarno	                        GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net