CLDR-18369 Revise era codes based on March 20 discussion #4519
Conversation
sffc
changed the title
| <era type="0" end="284-08-28" code="??? TODO ???"/> | ||
| <era type="1" start="284-08-29" code="am" primary="true"/> <!-- Anno Martyrum --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a suggestion at tc39/proposal-intl-era-monthcode#25 (comment):
the Coptic calendar should have eras BD and AD, not BM and AM
However, it's at least partly at odds with other resources I can find, all of which use "AM" or "A.M.":
- https://suscopts.org/coptic-orthodox/fasts-and-feasts/
- https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/coptic-calendar.html
- https://en.orthodoxwiki.org/Coptic_Calendar#The_Coptic_year
- https://www.stvnashville.org/coptic-new-year#yui_3_17_2_1_1742572291617_643
I do see references to A.D. (from "anno Diocletiani"), but concrete usage seems rare. I have no opinion on which is more correct here.
| <era type="0" end="8-08-28" code="aa" aliases="mundi"/> <!-- Amete Alem --> | ||
| <era type="1" start="8-08-29" code="am" aliases="incar" primary="true"/> <!-- Amete Mihret --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
consider removing the aliases, they're our invention afaict
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Our invention or not, if an ID has been in any release, it needs to be deprecated but maintained as an alias.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In theory yes, but if neither ICU, nor ICU4X, nor Temporal, nor any implementation we know of has used these, can we be a bit flexible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd like to discuss this question in the CLDR Design WG meeting. As a general principle I agree with @macchiati, but I don't have evidence that these codes are used anywhere, so I might prefer making an exception in this one case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have evidence that these codes are used anywhere, so I might prefer making an exception in this one case.
Well, it is really the opposite question. Unless we have proof they are they are not used anywhere I think we should keep the old codes as aliases. We do not necessarily know who all of the clients of CLDR data are and how they use it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We discussed this in the 2025-03-31 CLDR Design WG meeting and the conclusion from that meeting (based on the people who happened to be in attendance that day) was that given how news these codes are, and given that ICU does not use them, and Temporal doesn't use them yet, and that they were added for Temporal, they are new enough that we can just drop the codes currently in the XML.
But I do not want to block this PR on that discussion so if adding the existing codes as aliases is going to move this forward, I'll do that
| </eras> | ||
| </calendar> | ||
| <calendar type="roc"> | ||
| <eras> | ||
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="roc-inverse" aliases="before-roc"/> | ||
| <era type="1" start="1912-01-01" code="roc" aliases="minguo"/> | ||
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="minguo-qian" aliases="broc before-roc"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="minguo-qian" aliases="broc before-roc"/> | |
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="minguo-qian"/> |
| </eras> | ||
| </calendar> | ||
| <calendar type="ethiopic"> | ||
| <calendarSystem type="other"/> | ||
| <eras> | ||
| <era type="0" end="8-08-28" code="ethioaa" aliases="ethiopic-amete-alem mundi"/> | ||
| <era type="1" start="8-08-29" code="ethiopic" aliases="incar"/> | ||
| <era type="0" end="8-08-28" code="aa" aliases="mundi"/> <!-- Amete Alem --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <era type="0" end="8-08-28" code="aa" aliases="mundi"/> <!-- Amete Alem --> | |
| <era type="0" start="-5492-08-29" code="aa" aliases="mundi"/> <!-- Amete Alem --> |
|
@macchiati any comments on this before you disappear on vacation? (I see you already left one regarding ID stability) |
| </eras> | ||
| </calendar> | ||
| <calendar type="indian"> | ||
| <eras> | ||
| <era type="0" start="79-01-01" code="indian" aliases="saka"/> | ||
| <era type="0" start="79-01-01" code="saka"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
given that we cannot use the correct spelling "Śaka", maybe this should be "shaka".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="roc-inverse" aliases="before-roc"/> | ||
| <era type="1" start="1912-01-01" code="roc" aliases="minguo"/> | ||
| <era type="0" end="1911-12-31" code="minguo-qian" aliases="broc before-roc"/> | ||
| <era type="1" start="1912-01-01" code="minguo" primary="true"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calendar_correspondence_table uses "AM", presumably that means "Anno Minguoae" (pardon my Latin).
CLDR-18369
ALLOW_MANY_COMMITS=true