Eemeli Aro
Eemeli Aro
Closed by #1076
> I also suspect there are cases where someone might want `{$amount :number style=currency currency=$myCurr}` I'd be fine with `currency` and `unit` supported as normal options. That's what we had...
Ok, that makes sense. Struck out that line from the post above.
That's one part of the next steps here, yes, but also separately we need to conclude the specific discussion raised by @sffc in particular on whether or not the default...
Forbidding variants with exactly the same keys would also be in line with the validity requirement we impose on options: https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/blob/4514e880a8690ba2dd78a70696b4c89db93697ba/spec/syntax.md?plain=1#L580-L581 Regarding which, we probably need language somewhere noting that...
@aphillips Could you clarify whether you think we should or should not add a message validity requirement about identical variant keys? As in, do you think that the following message...
So let's not fail selection then for plurals, if an `other` key is present. To repeat myself from above: > It is however possible to define selectors such as `:plural`...
Dropping the `out-of-scope?` label as that was about the LDML54 release.
This is still just as possible as always: > If we were to make the current error a runtime Selection Error like "No Variant Selected" instead of a Data Model...
As with #602, this is an issue for which external input would be useful, and for which we could/should explicitly seek feedback.