[Bug localedata/23208] New locale - Lower Sorbian (dsb)

["maiku.fabian at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23208

--- Comment #2 from Mike FABIAN <maiku.fabian at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Rafal Luzynski from comment #1)

> > LC_COLLATE
> > copy "iso14651_t1"
> > 
> > % CLDR collation rules for Lower Sorbian:
> > % (see:https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/trunk/common/collation/dsb.xml)
> > %
> > [...]
> 
> Mike is an expert at collation so I leave it to him.
> 
> Does Lower Sorbian use exactly the same alphabet and collation rules as
> Upper Sorbian?  If yes then maybe “copy "hsb_DE"” would be sufficient?

In CLDR,

https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/trunk/common/collation/dsb.xml
https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/trunk/common/collation/hsb.xml

are *exactly* the same. So it looks a bit weird why CLDR does not
use "[import dsb]" in the collation of "hsb" or vice versa.
They do  this for  example for fa_AF and  ps:

https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/trunk/common/collation/ps.xml

contains the collation rules and fa_AF just imports them because

https://unicode.org/cldr/trac/browser/trunk/common/collation/fa_AF.xml

contains:

    <collations>
            <collation type="standard">
                    <cr><![CDATA[
                            [import ps]
                    ]]></cr>
            </collation>
    </collations>

So we could use “copy "hsb_DE"” in glibc if we want.

If the data in the file in this bug has been copied and pasted from
the hsb_DE glibc locale, that should be correct as well of course.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.