Re: Support for Hungarian, Russian, Polish, in Jaguar?

FROM : Douglas Davidson
DATE : Mon Jan 27 10:20:03 2003

On Monday, January 27, 2003, at 08:54  AM, Kevin Bohan wrote:

> I do see the difference, and perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I am
> merely pointing out that the documentation I included the link for, to
> me, reads that you should say "Japanese.lproj" on the one hand, and
> use a two-letter codes on the other hand "ja.lproj".
>
> You inperpret this to mean point that you should use the more verbose
> "French.lproj" if you want to match to a non-specific French, and only
> use the two-letter form when qualifying it with a specific local, as
> in fr_CA.lproj.
>
> By corollary, you would not use "fr.lproj" to describe the general
> French case.
>
> Which is at is not quite what is said by "<email_removed>", who
> indicated that you should always use the two letter form (with some
> special reference to the three-letter form, which is not relevant
> here). So this would indicate that the general French case would be
> "fr.lproj".


The documentation is perhaps not entirely clear.  Our recommendation
going forward is that "fr.lproj" be used for non-region-specific
French, and that "fr_FR.lproj" and "fr_CA.lproj" be used for
region-specific French localizations.  In addition, there should be a
"fr.lproj" whenever there is a "fr_FR.lproj" or a "fr_CA.lproj".  The
form "French.lproj" is treated as an equivalent of "fr.lproj", but it
is an earlier form that is supported for compatibility; the recommended
form is "fr.lproj".

Douglas Davidson