Kaixo!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 12:39:10AM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
On 4/13/05, Pablo Saratxaga <pablo(a)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.))
--
Ki ça vos våye bén,
Pablo Saratxaga
http://chanae.walon.org/pablo/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0xD9B85466
[you can write me in Walloon, Spanish, French, English, Catalan or Esperanto]
[min povas skribi en valona, esperanta, angla aux latinidaj lingvoj]