[RFC] New category proposal, i18n

[Mark Foster]

perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
>>> 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.
>   
If I may be so bold as to present a democratic outcome.
To help settle the matter please vote on this issue within 48 hours.
<http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpview/615850-178803>