[maemo-developers] [maemo-developers] Re: About Ubuntu installer import into Rosetta

[From: A S Alam]

ਵੀਰਵਾਰ 16 ਮਾਰਚ 2006 21:36 ਨੂੰ, Jordi Mallach ਨੇ ਲਿਖਿਆ:
> Hi everyone,
>
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 04:48:46PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > We did choose pa_IN because Punjabi can either be written with the
> > Gurmukhi script (Indic-style script, used in Punjab/India) or using an
> > Perso-Arabic script, use in Pakistan.
> >
> > So, the difference is pretty much similar to the zh_CN/zh_TW
> > difference: two different ways to *write* the same language.
> >
> > However, here, the difference is more subtle as Punjabi is also
> > *spoken* differently in India and Pakistan. I remember Amanpreet
> > explaining me that he actually cannot understand Punjabi spoken by
> > people from Pakistan.
> >
> > So, the conclusion was using pa_IN for Punjabi (Gurmukhi) and leave
> > pa_PK for Punjabi (Perso-Arabic).
>
> Ok, that makes is pretty complicated.
>
> We need to consider that projects seem to be using the simple "pa"
> namespace already. GNOME and KDE use "pa" for its Punjabi translations,
> and many are contributed by aalam at redhat.com (I guess that makes them
> somehow offiically endorsed by RH/Fedora).
>

yes, I m Amanpreet Singh  Alam working in Red Hat and 
translating most community projects for Punjabi 
(Gurmukhi, Eastern), and I don't think anything bad if I m working in 
Red Hat, but Important thing is that We have Punjabi translation available:)

> By the looks of the script, it totally looks like the Indian variant.
> msgid "Ellipses (Translucent)"
> msgstr "ਅੰਡਾਕਾਰ (ਕਲਪਨਿਕ)"

yes, only Indian Variant is active now and there is no singal for 
Western soon
>
> > Another way to make the difference (but it would involve writing the
> > appropriate locales) would be using the names "Punjabi (Eastern)" and
> > "Punjabi (Western)" and there, use the two different ISO 639-3 codes:
> >
> > pnb==Punjabi (Western)
> > pan==Punjabi (Eastern) == the current pa_IN
>
I don't think so, because langs are same, but writing scripts are 
different, so
I suppose like
pa, pa at gur =pa_IN (Eastern Punjabi)
pa at shahmukhi (parien)=Punjabi (Western)
> Looks like a compromise to me, but this needs to be accepted, imo,
> globally by all translation teams, or at least the major players, or
> it'll be a mess.
>

yes, Now Also have to select something reasonable CODE.

> If I had to make a decision now wrt d-i, I would stick to "pa" for what
> we have now, as it's what is widely spread at the moment. Is there any
> known pa at Persian translation group out there at the moment?
>
no, Not at a single place, but our team (http://punlinux.sourceforge.net/)
are under progess for planning of that. Yet Locale itself is not defined
for "pa at Persian"

I forgot to mention about locale defined in glib, there is only
Punjabi (Eastern) is defined as "pa", but Punjabi (Western) NO.

so, we have time to work now:)

thanks
> > PS: no need to tell you, folks, that severe political consequences are
> >     involved here.
>
> Yeah, don't tell me about it. We live in Valencia, the land of the
> blaveros ;)
>
> Jordi

-- 
A S Alam

"Either find a way or make one"