Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

[Msavoritias <email@msavoritias.me>]

What I am saying here is that:
Its easy to see from our very US centric tech culture why everybody
should just use ASCII because "This is how it is". But there is very
little reasons why we shouldn't strive to be more inclusive of all
cultures.
Especially since nowadays where we have tools like Unicode that make our
lives easier compared to US or nothing of 30-40 years ago.
Just imagine how many good programmers we are missing because they don't
want/can't learn English or don't have an ASCII keyboard.

MSavoritias

MSavoritias <email@msavoritias.me> writes:

> Nguyễn Gia Phong <cnx@loang.net> writes:
>
>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>> On 2023-08-24 at 10:41+03:00, MSavoritias wrote:
>>> Nguyễn Gia Phong <cnx@loang.net> writes:
>>> > I think the distinction must be made here between Guix and GuixSD.
>>> >
>>> > The packaging software should support full localization,
>>> > but the distro should target the least common denominator.
>>>
>>> Depends what do we mean the "distro" here.
>>> If I can pick arabic or chinese in the installation as a display
>>> language and also I am able to use an arabic/chinese keyboard sounds
>>> good to me.
>>
>> I meant GuixSD.  I agree a distribution based on Guix Systems
>> shouldn't meet any obstacle declaring packages with non-ASCII names.
>> That you can type arabic and chinese and I can type hangul
>> and most latin characters doesn't mean names having all of the above
>> will be accessible to either of us or a third person.
>>
>> On 2023-08-24 at 10:41+03:00, MSavoritias wrote:
>>> Regarding the initial question it was about package names to my
>>> understanding. Specifically package names in the store to use unicode
>>> characters. Which makes perfect sense there because some packages dont
>>> use ascii names.
>>
>> It does, but as said before, whether this is desireable depends
>> on the target audience.  The purpose of API is to be used,
>> i.e. it would be useless if even just one user can't type it.
>>
> Well we already have that don't we? What I mean is that ASCII names cant
> be typed by all keyboards layouts easily. So what you are saying already
> happens. Thats why I always have an ASCII layout available as a
> secondary, next to my non ASCII. I bet every person that uses packages
> with names other than english can add a seperate layout.
>
>> On 2023-08-24 at 10:41+03:00, MSavoritias wrote:
>>> Regarding the broken install example, most (all?) base
>>> packages use ASCII due to unix historical baggage.
>>> So you shouldn't need to type anything non ASCII
>>> to fix an install with only basic packages.
>>
>> Due to historical baggage, most (all?) keyboard layouts can fall
>> back to ASCII alphanumerics.  A broken install was given
>> as the worst case; there's no reason any other packages
>> should be less accessible based on the users' culture.
>>
>
> But they are already aren't they? Because if I want to add a package
> with the Greek alphabet or the Japanese one I have to transliterate it
> into ASCII which is always going to be worse and people won't be able to
> find the package. Because they won't know we changed the name. Plus they
> will have to change the layout. Same as an ASCII user would have to do.
>
>> I suggest, in an international context such as GuixSD,
>> for every package to have a ASCII name.  It'd of course
>> be better if a correctly written name is also available.
>>
>
> So you propose two names? Sure if that can be done I don't see why not. Either way not
> having unicode names is a bug. Also to note: Most of the world speaks
> Unicode. So its more for compatibility purposes i guess (?) rather than
> to be "international".
>
> MSavoritias