Here is the new patch, Please review it. On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 8:38 PM समीर सिंह Sameer Singh < lumarzeli30@gmail.com> wrote: > I think "Tagalog" as the English label in HELLO is okay, but the >> script native name in parentheses should be Baybayin. >> >> > I was also thinking about changing the >> > input method from Tagalog to Baybayin, should I do that? >> >> No, I think it should be 'tagalog', but the doc string should say that >> it supports the Baybayin script. >> >> > Is this really so important? The Wikipedia article says that Filipino >> > is a version of Tagalog standardized by the constitution of 1987. >> > Wouldn't it be better to support a modern language used nowadays and >> > not just its older version? >> > >> > Doesn't the modern language use the Roman script, instead of Baybayin? >> > >> > Looking at this another way: what will an Emacs user expect to find in >> > Emacs as the supported language for the Philippines? >> > >> > Atleast according to me, correct me if I am a filipino user will use >> the Roman script for the filipino language, >> > while writing Tagalog he may look for Baybayin, which we >> > have provided under the Tagalog language environment. >> >> OK, but please revise the doc strings and the comments to make sure we >> use "Tagalog" for the language and "Baybayin" for the script (except >> where we use the script name inherited from Unicode, which is actually >> the name of the Unicode block). AFAICT, the patch you posted wasn't >> consistent in that regard. And NEWS should mention both the language >> and the script names. >> > > Thanks I will do these. > > Btw, what fonts are considered to be good nowadays for displaying >> Tagalog/Baybayin? >> > > https://github.com/ctrlcctrlv/Noto-Sans-Tagalog/tree/master/dist > This is what worked best for me, the older Noto font did not have > characters for Ra, Alternative Ra, and Pamudpod, this one has it. > > On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 3:08 PM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> > Cc: 55529@debbugs.gnu.org >> > Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 11:23:03 +0300 >> > From: Eli Zaretskii >> > >> > > Looking at this another way: what will an Emacs user expect to find >> in >> > > Emacs as the supported language for the Philippines? >> > > >> > > Atleast according to me, correct me if I am a filipino user will use >> the Roman script for the filipino language, >> > > while writing Tagalog he may look for Baybayin, which we >> > > have provided under the Tagalog language environment. >> > >> > OK, but please revise the doc strings and the comments to make sure we >> > use "Tagalog" for the language and "Baybayin" for the script (except >> > where we use the script name inherited from Unicode, which is actually >> > the name of the Unicode block). AFAICT, the patch you posted wasn't >> > consistent in that regard. And NEWS should mention both the language >> > and the script names. >> >> Btw, what fonts are considered to be good nowadays for displaying >> Tagalog/Baybayin? >> >