Hi Richard, On Friday, 2019-04-19 03:32:34 +0100, Richard Wordingham wrote: > In answer to what was intended to be a rhetorical question, I suppose > und-Latn-t-sa-m0-iast and und-Latn-t-sa-m0-iso would work for the > normative forms. Seem.. at least when entered at https://r12a.github.io/app-subtags/ in the Check form it doesn't overly complain. However, I'd avoid 'und', to me it annotates as "can't determine what this could be" and in fact it is listed as Undetermined. Also, my guess is most applications would not support these tags at all. Of course it depends what you want to use it for, whether it's inhouse tagging you control the tools used with these tags, or meant for publicly available classification of languages. Where some standardization among the parties involved would come handy.. > I've successfully loaded a mocked up extension for the > former (as explicitly using a Western script), though I don't much like > the consequent tagging <style:text-properties ... fo:language="und"> in > the document's content.xml. Yes, that's ugly, but unavoidable. For which sa-Latn would be a better solution. Eike -- GPG key 0x6A6CD5B765632D3A - 2265 D7F3 A7B0 95CC 3918 630B 6A6C D5B7 6563 2D3A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
