Manish Goregaokar
Manish Goregaokar
A lossy Display seems nice to have. I think the original design of having these be mutually exclusive is fine.
- @sffc (reiterates comments in issue) - @robertbastian If the only way to trigger these errors is bad data, do we have to signal the errors? In most of ICU4X...
Yeah, the implementation concern is mostly that 3-character primary language tags are a good optimization that has benefits all over the codebase. 4-character language tags are unlikely to ever materialize...
> but note that Intl.Locale is currently (with quirky exceptions like those above) a "well-formed" implementation by BCP47 Not in the current spec, though? Current spec references Unicode, not BCP47,...
> Most programming languages won't garner the same benefits I think basically all programming languages used for implementing browsers and JS engines will. Stack size optimizations are common in this...
> What are the other examples of where ECMA-402 locales differ from ULIs? Is it `i-enochian`? The underscores and "root" and starts-with-script-tag bits. ULIs document these as additions, and ECMA402...
> That description seems to be of what UTS35 calls a [unicode_bcp47_locale_id](https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35.html#unicode_bcp47_locale_id). The differences are found [here](https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35.html#BCP_47_Conformance). Yeah the "BCP 47 conformance" section is what I was talking about, which...
I guess an interesting question is: is the purpose of `Intl.Locale` to be fed to other `Intl` APIs, or do we consider it to also be a general-purpose locale abstraction...
That seems reasonable!
I took a look at this and it was not immediately obvious how to merge in UtcOffset data. Unconditionally (if there is a utcoffset, use it instead of computing standard?)...