[RFC] New category proposal, i18n

[Chris Rees]

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.

Chris



-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in a mailing list?