Bug 6159

Created attachment 4843 [details]
Kurdish Latin keyboard configuration

These are the three Kurdish Latin keyboard configurations. They are tested with
xkbcomp and setxkbmap.

Created attachment 4844 [details]
Kurdish Latin keyboard configuration

Just changed one key.

I am generally happy with this layout. But the question is where to put it. The
current system is country-based. Should I put these layouts into Iraq's file
(symbols/iq), or Iran's (symbols/ir) or both or into some other iso code?
Just please please do not get too political - I am just trying to figure out
where would the actual users of this layout live.

Hi, 

I know the political trouble very well. I have never thought about the fact that
the listing is country-based. In fact, most users will come from Turkey, second
most from Iran and then Syria and Iraq. 

The only locale so far in glibc is ku_TR (at least for Ubuntu, which is the best
translated distribution in Kurdish), so it would make sense to put it to Turkey,
too. I have no problem with that, I hope nobody else does.

By the way, will this help us with bug #5573 ?

> By the way, will this help us with bug #5573 ?
Not sure. Xlib locales are not related to the layout availability.

Another question - looking at your layout I find it VERY similar to the Turkish
one. Would it make sense to derive it from the Turkish layout - by using the
"include" statement and overriding only the keys which are different? Also, one
more question - are all 3 varuants really used, or are they included just
because Turkish layout have them? No offence, just checking...

Hi,

yes of course, it is the Turkish layout with the additional Kurdish letters. I
have even tried to include the Turkish letters for use with "right alt", so that
one can write both languages comfortably with one keyboard. In fact there is no
real standard for Kurdish yet, we have made a survey and most people wanted it
close to Turkish.

Use "include" whereever suitable.

Q (standard) and F are used for sure. Alt-q was a great idea for Turkish
(Windows has no such thing) and I find it very practial. I use it all the time.

> Use "include" whereever suitable.
Ghm, I could try this - but I would never be able to test the result. Could I
please ask you for a favor to create minimal versions of Kurdish variants based
on the Turkish ones, using the "include" statement? I think it would be more
efficient...

> Q (standard) and F are used for sure. Alt-q was a great idea for Turkish
> (Windows has no such thing) and I find it very practial. I use it all the time.
Well, about Q and F I see. About the Alt-q I am not so sure. Is it only using it
- or there is really a number of users?

I am not able to thest the result either a the moment, because a bug in Ubuntu
Dapper breaks all the keyboard configurations :(

Can we use this keyboard now and simplify it later? Because of this am I am sure
that it works. 

OK, when I have time to do proper 'diff' of two (well, 6) keyboard, I will do
it. But not sure when it is going to happen:)

Our point is, we would love to see it in Ubuntu Dapper, which comes out on June
1st, freeze is somewhen in May. I am ready to do anything to make it happen. 

Well, what I'd be interested in is something 

default partial
xkb_symbols "basic" {

    include "tr(basic)"

    name[Group1]="Kurdish - Latin Q";

 // here go all the symbols which are different from tr(basic)
...
};

and similar for other varians (F and Alt-Q)

Created attachment 5015 [details]
Kurdish Latin keyboard configuration with includes

I based the configurations on the Turkish as you said.

The line 

  include "level3(ralt_switch)"

existed in all three, I have not included it, I think it is sufficient if it is
in the Turkish originals. The keyboards work for me.

That's what I wanted. I will commit it ASAP.

Hi,

with what letters will it show up? If I use the command

setxbmap ku2

then in the Gnome-Panel "ku2" appears, or whatever the filename is. It should be
"Kur" instead. Or is that independent from this configuration and a Gnome-Panel
issue?

Committed.

It will be tr(ku*) variants. And appear as "Turkey - Kurdish, ..." in GNOME GUI

It is okay to have it as "Turkey - Kurdish..." in the list. But if on the GNOME
keyboard applet "Tur" instead of "Kur" appears, that would be very strange indeed...

It is a keyboard for the Kurdish language, not one bound to a region. It is for
Kurdish in Europe as well as for Kurdish in Australia. So the short expression
should be "Kur", not "Tur".

Well, it is valid point. Currently GNOME shows short descriptions on per-layout
basis, without distinguising variants. Most probably it should be fixed (and
sure clean patches are welcome;)

(In reply to comment #20)
> Well, it is valid point. Currently GNOME shows short descriptions on per-layout
> Most probably it should be fixed (and sure clean patches are welcome;)

An easy fix would be to list it under "Kurdistan" instead of Turkey. The
keyboard will be used in Iran, Iraq and Syria as well, there are already
complaints from Iranian Kurds
(https://launchpad.net/products/language-selector/+bug/40829).

> An easy fix would be to list it under "Kurdistan" instead of Turkey. The
> keyboard will be used in Iran, Iraq and Syria as well, there are already
> complaints from Iranian Kurds
I would be absolutely happy to add this variant to Iran/Iraq/Syria. But
unfortunately ISO3166 does not know about Kurdistan, does it? Is there special
code for it?

No it's not in ISO 3166. That's exactly why it has to be fixed (here). The list
contains of souvereign states, which have sometimes little to do with languages.

In Windows you can choose "English" and in brackets (U.S) or (UK) or whatever,
which is ok for keyboards, because they are about language.

Gnome does it the other way round, which fits our need worse. Iraq (Kurdish
Latin) and Iraq (Arabic) would make less sense than plain "Kurdish" (Latin) and
"Kurdish (Arabic), but are of course correct. I just find it easier and more
logical to create one entry "Kurdish" or "Kurdistan" than twelve entries for all
three keyboard variants in four countries. Especially if you think of those
variants to come for the Arabic script keyboards.

To include "Kurdistan" although it is NOT in the ISO list would be a workaround
and make the new Kurdish keyboards easy to find for everybody. If you use "KU"
it will be understood. It is the language code according to ISO 639.

> Gnome does it the other way round, which fits our need worse. Iraq (Kurdish
Please do not mix gnome and xkeyboard-config, ok?:)
There was discussion about language-based vs country-based layouts. Currently
xkeyboard-config is using country-based approach. In very special situations we
are using language-based layouts (and still trying to eliminate them
altogether). So I would fight hard in order not to add new language-based layouts.

> three keyboard variants in four countries. Especially if you think of those
> variants to come for the Arabic script keyboards.
Yes, Arabic is one of very few layouts still depending on language. I'd love to
move it to the relevant countries - but still hesitate. Still Kurdish is used in
4 countries _only_, I do not see it as a special situation. BTW, are you 100%
sure all Kurdish layouts are same in all 4 countries?

> Please do not mix gnome and xkeyboard-config, ok?:)

Sorry for that ;)

> In very special situations we
> are using language-based layouts (and still trying to eliminate them
> altogether). 

What is the reason for this? You know that there are 22 Arabic countries, but
far less keyboards.

> BTW, are you 100%
> sure all Kurdish layouts are same in all 4 countries?

I am sure that there is no standard yet. There have been several workarounds for
Windows in the past, but none is a real standard yet. As far as I know there is
no Kurdish-Latin keyboard produced by any company yet, though that is likely
going to change in the near future.

My mentioning of Arabic script was aimed at Kurdish with Arabic script. We have
three Kurdish-Latin keyboards now, but there are several Kurdish-Arabic keyboard
layouts to come. Wouldn't it be strange not to have "Iraq (Arabic)" in the list,
but "Iraq" with five Kurdish keyboard layouts? That would alienate not only
Kurds, but even more Iraqi Arabs.

Another aspect is that a lot of Kurdish writing people are abroad, in Europe and
America. They would clearly prefer a language based approach.

Of course, if the country based approach is taken, then go ahead, add the three
Kurdish-Latin keyboard layouts to all the four countries and be prepared for the
Kurdish-Arabic keyboard layouts. ;)

> What is the reason for this? You know that there are 22 Arabic countries, but
> far less keyboards.
I see. But there are also situations when one country (like india) has loads of
layouts. The main point was to get rid of the mixture of country-based layouts
and language-based layouts. At later stage we plan to allow group layouts on
per-country basis, but using base.xml only (not actual names)

> no Kurdish-Latin keyboard produced by any company yet, though that is likely
> going to change in the near future.
OK. Actually it would be good if all involved people could get together and
elaborate one layout...

> layouts to come. Wouldn't it be strange not to have "Iraq (Arabic)" in the list,
> but "Iraq" with five Kurdish keyboard layouts? That would alienate not only
> Kurds, but even more Iraqi Arabs.
Well, this is a valid point. May be we should add Iraq (Arabic) as well.

> Another aspect is that a lot of Kurdish writing people are abroad, in Europe and
> America. They would clearly prefer a language based approach.
I see what you mean. But I really do not want to break the rule.
 
> Of course, if the country based approach is taken, then go ahead, add the three
> Kurdish-Latin keyboard layouts to all the four countries and be prepared for the
> Kurdish-Arabic keyboard layouts. ;)
"Be prepared" sounds familiar to me:) Ok, I'll add these layouts.

Committed as iq/in/sy.