3 ms·
As others mentioned, different languages have different typography rules. Our toolset is English-based and making it generic for any language would be extremely
by acabal 6y ago
As others mentioned, different languages have different typography rules. Our toolset is English-based and making it generic for any language would be extremely difficult and time consuming. Additionally, all of us read in (at least) English, and at least I can't credibly say I'm a grammar/typography expert in any other language.
In the past people have expressed interest in forking the toolset for other languages, which is totally fine. But I don't think I've seen any of those attempts come to fruition yet.
- ronjouch 6y agoHi! Thanks for chiming in :) In another comment of this sub-thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25140605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25140605 ) I wrote: > "Still, I like SE a lot and might be interested in doing the work. So, I'll make my point to the ML (expanding on A. points I brought here, and B. contradictions that commenters brought), asking if folks are convinced by the vision, and asking for technical advice to build the incremental path. Then if there's agreement, maybe I, or someone else, will commit to it." Do you think it remains worthwhile that I bring the discussion, or is it 100% nailed among current maintainers that the "incremental path" I'm hoping for doesn't exist and "just fork / do your own thing for your language and register your domain" is already the consensus?