Some and/or list issues


Deleted Component: other

See (as of 22/8, 2018)

{0} a(c) {1} ·cy·
{0} a {1} ·lb·

{0} a {1} ·lb·

Welsh uses "a" before a consonant and "ac" before a vowel. Perhaps "ac" is a suitable default. Seems better that using parentheses.

For Luxembourgish, only "an" is listed for "and" in (English) Wiktionary.


{0}, a(c) {1} ·cy·
{0}, agus {1} ·ga·
{0}, akked {1} ·kab·
{0}, at {1} ·fil·
{0}, dan {1} ·id·
{0}, ne-{1} ·zu·
{0}, እና {1} ·am·
{0}, ଓ {1} ·or·
{0}, ಮತ್ತು {1} ·kn·
{0}, සහ {1} ·si·
{0}, ᎠᎴ {1} ·chr·

{0}, atau {1} ·id· ·ms·
{0}, ella {1} ·fo·
{0}, neɣ {1} ·kab·
{0}, nó {1} ·ga·
{0}, o {1} ·fil·
{0}, or {1} ·all·others·
{0}, pe {1} ·br·
{0}, pē {1} ·to·
{0}, yaxud {1} ·az·
{0}, же {1} ·ky·
{0}, не болмаса {1} ·kk·
{0}, эсвэл {1} ·mn·
{0}, או {1} ·he·
{0}, يا {1} ·sd·
{0}, किंवा {1} ·mr·
{0}, वा {1} ·ne·
{0}, বা {1} ·bn·
{0}, અથવા {1} ·gu·
{0}, ಅಥವಾ {1} ·kn·
{0}, അല്ലെങ്കിൽ {1} ·ml·
{0}, හෝ {1} ·si·
{0}, ᎠᎴᏱᎩ {1} ·chr·
{0}، یا {1} ·fa· ·ur·
{0}、または{1} ·ja·

{0}, kple {1} ·ee·
{0}, u {1} ·mt·
{0}, සහ {1} ·si·

These seem to have copied the English-only idea of putting a comma before the "and"/"or" at the penultimate of such lists when three elements or longer. I do think it is an English-only idea, whatever the merits or dis-merits of doing so. It is not universally applied for English either. If you want to argue for the merits of punctuating this way, it should be done to various language committees, not "sneaked in" via CLDR.

{0}, {1} ·rm· ·all·others·

{0}, or {1} ·all·others·

As I have pointed out before, the "all others" in charts is NOT helpful; indeed it is anti-helpful. If it means "inherited from root without confirmation" (which I guess it might mean), then say so. This is a charts issue so far; but it hides errors. I'm sure that "or" is basically English, and for most other locales it is an error to use "or" without translation. If "all others" really means "inherited from root", then note that root should not contain any English. In case of "and" use "&" in root, and for "or", it is probably best to use "|" in root (using ∧ and ∨ would be possible, but not well recognisable to most readers). While English is wery much a "global" language, it is best kept out of root even so.

{0}、{1} ·ja· (for "2" and "end"; as well as start&middle)

But Japanese has a bunch of words that means "and" (including そして, 及び and more). Not sure which is the best to use, but surely at least one of them is suitable.

English Wiktionary has "Japanese: 然して (そして, soshite)" for the "used at the end of a list to indicate the last item" case.

{0}, {1} എന്നിവ ·ml· (for start and middle)

This one seems strange. In use it will pile up a bunch of എന്നിവ after ALL elements of the list, like

like "polish notation" for arithmetic. I'm sure that is not intended here.






May 9, 2019, 8:51 PM
Trac Comment 6 by kent.karlsson14@0885cc00c95d6cd9—2018-10-04T12:31:22.759Z

Lists are "normally" interpreted as right associative (as in Lisp and many other programming languages that have "native" lists).

So in this case:

({0}, {1} Z)[a,b,c,d] -> a, ({0}, {1} Z)[b,c,d] Z -> a, b, ({0}, {1} Z)[c,d] Z Z -> a, b, c, d Z Z Z

You seem to have interpreted them as left associative. That is very odd from a "general" programmer's point of view, given the experience from several programming languages that have "native" lists.

Still, the result, also when the list are (oddly!) interpreted as left associative, is a bit strange. It is probably not the intended result. See comment 5.

May 9, 2019, 8:51 PM
Trac Comment 1.7 by kent.karlsson14@0885cc00c95d6cd9—2018-10-04T13:27:30.727Z

Replying to (Comment 1 mark):

These are the results of vetters' review and entry of data. It is not "snuck in" by the CLDR-TC.

(I did *not* write "-TC".)

So, did you consult the appropriate language committees/similar? Or even just prod vetters specially? If not, my statement still stands, since this is a point where it is *extra* easy to do a voting mistake.

May 9, 2019, 8:51 PM
Trac Comment 8 by kent.karlsson14@0885cc00c95d6cd9—2018-10-04T13:31:51.459Z

A priori, with just commas, the list is ambiguous. One needs to say that this is an "and" list somehow.

(Perhaps aside, but relevant: It is not uncommon for "or"-lists to be written without a word indicating "or", but instead there is a preamble, e.g. "select at least one and at most 4 items from the list below". Often also written without comma but with "extras" such as check boxes; but could also be simple comma list. Also an "and" list can be written with just commas (or bullets...), but with a preamble, e.g. "all of the following are needed:".)

May 9, 2019, 8:51 PM
Trac Comment 10 by —2018-11-16T16:42:08.473Z

This is an issue for the translators to consider in the survey tool. Note that people can have a "preamble" to the list or a "post-amble".

Alexis Hunt
July 21, 2020, 3:58 AM

Poking my head in here since I was curious what formatting Japanese used. I’m not very familiar with the language but I’m familiar enough to know that と is the usual list separator and I’d be very surprised if a native speaker thought that commas were always correct.













Fix versions