[RFC] New category proposal, i18n

[Carlos A. M. dos Santos]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:24 AM, Chris Rees<utisoft at googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2009/6/25  <perryh at pluto.rain.com>:
>>> > If i18n is too cryptic or too alphanumeric, and
>>> > internationalization is too long, why not go with "nls"?
>>>
>>> I personally think that nls is equally as cryptic as i18n or l10n.
>>
>> Anyone care for "intlzn"?  It's short, should still tab-complete
>> from "in", and it may be a bit less cryptic than nls, i18n, or l10n.
>
> I was thinking intl, but your suggestion's better.

Guys, you have been discussing the category *name* for eight days now
without reaching a consensus. This is becoming somewhat boring. Please
do not reinvent the wheel. Whether you like it or not, i18n is a well
established and widely accepted acronym.

-- 
My preferred quotation of Robert Louis Stevenson is "You cannot
make an omelette without breaking eggs". Not because I like the
omelettes, but because I like the sound of eggs being broken.