From doug at ewellic.org Wed Jul 6 15:19:31 2016 From: doug at ewellic.org (Doug Ewell) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 13:19:31 -0700 Subject: Software version numbers Message-ID: <20160706131931.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.4061511c1d.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> This is a general L10n question; apologies to the extent it's off-topic for CLDR. In locales which use the comma as decimal separator, is it ever the case that multi-part software version identifiers (such as "Perl 5.24.0") also follow this convention, or do these identifiers pretty much always use dots? Thanks, -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org From kent.karlsson14 at telia.com Wed Jul 6 15:59:47 2016 From: kent.karlsson14 at telia.com (Kent Karlsson) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:59:47 +0200 Subject: Software version numbers In-Reply-To: <20160706131931.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.4061511c1d.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> Message-ID: Version "numbers" (or rather number sequences) use full stop, as do section/ subsection/subsubsection/... number sequences in documents. At least in Europe... /Kent Karlsson Den 06/07/16 22:19, skrev "Doug Ewell" : > This is a general L10n question; apologies to the extent it's off-topic > for CLDR. > > In locales which use the comma as decimal separator, is it ever the case > that multi-part software version identifiers (such as "Perl 5.24.0") > also follow this convention, or do these identifiers pretty much always > use dots? > > Thanks, > > -- > Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org > > _______________________________________________ > CLDR-Users mailing list > CLDR-Users at unicode.org > http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/cldr-users From richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 6 17:09:23 2016 From: richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com (Richard Wordingham) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 23:09:23 +0100 Subject: Software version numbers In-Reply-To: References: <20160706131931.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.4061511c1d.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> Message-ID: <20160706230923.55f742d0@JRWUBU2> On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:59:47 +0200 Kent Karlsson wrote: > Version "numbers" (or rather number sequences) use full stop, as do > section/ subsection/subsubsection/... number sequences in documents. > At least in Europe... In particular, the British pre-ASCII tradition is to use MIDDLE DOT for the decimal point and FULL STOP to delimit the fields of section numbers. Richard. From verdy_p at wanadoo.fr Wed Jul 6 19:56:38 2016 From: verdy_p at wanadoo.fr (Philippe Verdy) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 02:56:38 +0200 Subject: Software version numbers In-Reply-To: <20160706230923.55f742d0@JRWUBU2> References: <20160706131931.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.4061511c1d.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> <20160706230923.55f742d0@JRWUBU2> Message-ID: dots are not always used as separators between sections and subsections. The common case is in many law references, or references to Bible or large books, that are numbering volumes (or using abbrevaited names), chapters, parts. Also for alineas and minor sections, numbering systems will switch between capital or lowercase roman numbers, capital or lowercase letters in an alphabet, and decimal numbers (or other national numbering systems, not necessarily decimal). Dots are used mostly between two decimal numbers, but other separators may also be used such as hyphens, parentheses, slashes, spaces and frequently some other keywords... Version numbers in softwares are not always purely numbers (major version+minor version+update number+build number is a common scheme, but this is not universal because many softwares are release with several parallel branches for testing, or specific customization by client profile or specific to a client; there are also other elements such as the platform types, or build type such as debug/checked or normal). We cannot really standardize the separators: each software provider uses its own scheme and formats. These version numbers are rarely localizable, except for transforming decimal digits from ASCII to another national numbering system, using basic character substitution. Some versioning systems in fact for not even use incremental numbers but some digital signatures or some opaque randomized GUID in a remote repository (such as Git) where you can get an image of the versions tree, and will append a version timestamp for easier comparison (this timestamp is localisable when displayed, the opaque signature or randomized GUID will typically not be displayed). Internally these version number formats are still stored as comparable numbers, but the mapping between both forms is not simple and platform dependant (it may be packed into several binary formats with more or less bits per field, and into a single integer or floatting point number, or into a more complex binary data structure). For all these reasons, I don't think that CLDR can standardize anything on version number formatting. It's generally best to consider these formatted numbers as opaque strings to display as is and let each application vendor interpret their own version numbering using their own utility library. 2016-07-07 0:09 GMT+02:00 Richard Wordingham < richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com>: > On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 22:59:47 +0200 > Kent Karlsson wrote: > > > Version "numbers" (or rather number sequences) use full stop, as do > > section/ subsection/subsubsection/... number sequences in documents. > > At least in Europe... > > In particular, the British pre-ASCII tradition is to use MIDDLE DOT for > the decimal point and FULL STOP to delimit the fields of section > numbers. > > Richard. > _______________________________________________ > CLDR-Users mailing list > CLDR-Users at unicode.org > http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/cldr-users > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: