1 |
Shyam Mani wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>Peter Humphrey wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> |
6 |
> |
7 |
>>I'd like to know what support there would be for splitting the two |
8 |
>>languages, so that original documents would be written using either the |
9 |
>>en_GB or the en_US locale and then be translated to the other. I'd be |
10 |
>>happy to contribute to such a translation effort. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> |
13 |
> |
14 |
>This is a serious waste of time IMHO. en_GB and en_US. Makes zero sense |
15 |
>to have two versions of the same doc. What about the other zillion en_* |
16 |
>locales? :) |
17 |
> |
18 |
> |
19 |
True, it would be expensive. As to the other en_*, US seems to be the |
20 |
only one that's making such a determined dash for freedom. :-P |
21 |
|
22 |
>My point is, if a doc is readable, understandable and correct |
23 |
>grammatically and/or otherwise...it is fine. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> |
26 |
|
27 |
Again, there's no such thing as "correct" grammar, so we must expect |
28 |
pleas for this or that stylistic change to continue indefinitely. :-) |
29 |
|
30 |
I'll subside now... |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Rgds |
34 |
Peter Humphrey |
35 |
Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93. |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
gentoo-doc@g.o mailing list |