Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:01:49 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: tabthorpe@freebsd.org Cc: corky1951@comcast.net, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] New category proposal, i18n Message-ID: <4a4312cd.yWDVqdLjAXRTY5Bn%perryh@pluto.rain.com> In-Reply-To: <200906240956.10625.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> References: <200906181114.43935.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <200906231506.05001.tabthorpe@freebsd.org> <20090623203608.GB15815@comcast.net> <200906240956.10625.tabthorpe@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > If i18n is too cryptic or too alphanumeric, and > > internationalization is too long, why not go with "nls"? > > I personally think that nls is equally as cryptic as i18n or l10n. Anyone care for "intlzn"? It's short, should still tab-complete from "in", and it may be a bit less cryptic than nls, i18n, or l10n.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4a4312cd.yWDVqdLjAXRTY5Bn%perryh>