Re: Proposal for an improved `help-for-help'

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 15:45:51 +0000
> Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, stefan@marxist.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> > Really?  I though i18n, l10n, and the like are established terminology
> > nowadays.
> 
> Yes, they are correct usage.  "Internationalisation" means "make
> something usable in lots of nations".

So where's the problem with using it in this case?

> For example:
> 
> >   https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/intl/international-support
> 
> That usage means "foreign", i.e. "non-USA".  It is not intended to
> support people who work in two or more nations, for example.
> 
> Surely we can do better than Microsoft, here.

Reality check: MS-Windows had i18n features and Unicode support long
before any other OS did.

> > There's also "multilingual" and m17n, but I thought it was less known.
> > However, maybe we should consider something like "Multilingual Help"?
> 
> Why?  Nobody wants "multilingual help" - at least not usually.  We each
> seek help in, if possible, our own language.

That's too close to casuistics for my palate, sorry.  So  I will bow
out of this part of the thread.  I still stand by my recommendations.