Kaixo!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 12:39:10AM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
On 4/13/05, Pablo Saratxaga pablo@mandriva.com wrote:
For Serbian maybe it isn't needed,
Huh... Maybe I can say that I can't belive. Around 50% of Serbs are using Latin alphabet as their primary alphabet! I am using Cyrillic,
I didn't say that it wasn't needed for Serbian, just that I didn't knew if sr: users needed it (which is different of wanted; yes it would be a welcome feature, but it isn't absolutely needed, as anyone litterate in Serbian language can read cyrillic; the situation is different for other languages where different communities use different alphabets and may not be able to read the other).
What I wanted to point out is that, even if the latin/cyrillic transliteration feature is not used in sr: or be:, the exploration of it is still usefull, as there are other languages that would benefit of it.
(btw, I wasn't aware that the proportion of latin alphabet users was so high; yes I knew that anyone could write it, and probably used it in thinks like sms or email, but thought than when it came to writting with a pen on a paper most people used cyrillic)
But, if we can use both, we should use both.
I fully agree (and there is no need to have a 50%-50% situation); btw in my work (I'm responsible of localization for a software company) I have long ago decided to provide the choice of both writtings (by requiring translators to use cyrillic, then converting from cyrillic to latin, as that is easy to do, while the conversion from latin to cyrillic is painfull, due to the high amount of things that must remain unchanged (urls, command names, file and path names, email addresses, etc.))