Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 17 Oct 2022 15:41:22 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
Cc:     Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>, bilbao@vt.edu,
        corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Documentation: Start translations to Spanish
Message-ID: <Y01pkubcT7FOwCjL@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20221014142454.871196-2-carlos.bilbao@amd.com>
 <48b4a5a1-2a52-4159-699b-9db73a012892@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48b4a5a1-2a52-4159-699b-9db73a012892@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 01:06:36PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> Hi,
> Minor nit on language code.
> 
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 09:24:53 -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> > Start the process of translating kernel documentation to Spanish. Create
> > sp_SP/ and include an index and a disclaimer, following the approach of
> > prior translations. Add Carlos Bilbao as MAINTAINER of this translation
> > effort.
> IIUC, the language code for "Spanish (Spain)" should be "es-ES", as is
> listed at e.g., http://www.lingoes.net/en/translator/langcode.htm.
> 
> The other translations use directory names found in the table, with
> "-" replaced with "_".  It would be better to be consistent.

I don't know what standard we're actually following.  RFC5646 suggests
simply using "es", with "es-419" for Latin America specialisation or
"es-ES" for Spain.  I don't know how much variation there is between
different Spanish dialects for technical documents; as I understand it,
it's worth supporting two dialects of Chinese, but we merrily mix &
match en_US and en_GB spellings.  Similarly, I wouldn't suggest that we
have separate translations for fr_CA, fr_CH, fr_FR, just a single 'fr'
would be fine.

We do need to be careful here; people are rightfully sensitive about
being incorrectly grouped together.  If possible we should find a
standard to follow that's been defined by experts in these matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IETF_language_tag may be a good place to
start looking.