Ned Freed writes:
Ok, so you are talking about misconfiguration case, while I was thinking about implementing LANGUAGE without implementing any languages case.I realize with all the attention i18n gets in the IETF it's likely to be considered an aberrant attitude, but there are plenty of cases where people don't want any i18n support on their systems. So I wouldn't call it misconfiguration per se.
Unless the software in question... hm... there are two ways to finish this sentence...
- sucks enough to break subtly when it can't find it i18n files. - is documented to require its i18n files.Personally I lean towards the first phrasing. And if we implement LANGUAGE we'll check that we have >1 language before announcing it.
Arnt