Renaming the "Persian Experimental Standard" Keyboard

[Connie Bobroff]

Does anyone have any objections to renaming the "Persian Experimental Standard" keyboard? The main idea would be to get rid of the word "experimental" since it is now official by ISIRI 9147. "Persian" should be the first word to make it easy to pick out

of a list of languages and the name should not be too long. Some suggestions:

"Persian Standard"

"Persian - Iranian"

"Persian - Iranian Standard"

 

-Connie

[Afshar Mohebbi]

I love "Persian Standard"

[Ehsan Akhgari]

I also like "Persian Standard".

--
Ehsan
<http://ehsanakhgari.org/>

[Ahmad Kiarostami]

I suggest adding ISIRI 9147 to the name, something like

"Persian Standard - ISIRI 9147"

-a.

[Behnam]

Agreed. But I'd go for
Persian ISIRI 9147
to make it shorter. this an IRI standard anyway so it's better to be
specified.
-b

[Ahmad Kiarostami]

Bahnam / Behdad's suggestion is even better.

-a.

On Sep 4, 2009, at 12:30 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:

> I agree with Behnam. It's an Iranian standard for a Persian
> keyboard layout. Something like "Persian (ISIRI 9147)" accurately
> reflects that.
>
> behdad

[Behdad Esfahbod]

I agree with Behnam. It's an Iranian standard for a Persian keyboard layout.
Something like "Persian (ISIRI 9147)" accurately reflects that.

behdad

On 09/04/2009 12:40 PM, Behnam wrote:
>

[Connie Bobroff]

I vote for "Persian ISIRI 9147" without parentheses.

[Behnam]

This just in!

http://typophile.com/node/61668

[Behnam Esfahbod ZWNJ]

I prefer "Persian - Iranian Standard" because of these reasons:

- It's a Persian layout (Azari, Kurdish, and other minor languages are
supposed to become a standard someday), so it should start with
"Persian"

- "ISIRI 9147" is not user-friendly. The standard number is that kind
of info that never helps the average user and just makes it hard to
remember or pass by.

- The GNOME / X.org / Linux keyboard system categorizes keyboard
layouts by country (by default) and so in a linux platform users will
find "Iranian > Persian" layout, so we will have Iranian and Persian
words there too, so it's better to stay only with those words and
don't add new ones.

- User can remember the whole phrase as "Persian/Iranian Standard".


-Behnam ZWNJ

--
' بهنام اسفهبد
' Behnam Esfahbod
'
* .. http://behnam.esfahbod.info
* ` *
* o * http://zwnj.org

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On 09/04/2009 06:46 PM, Behnam Esfahbod ZWNJ wrote:
>
> - "ISIRI 9147" is not user-friendly. The standard number is that kind
> of info that never helps the average user and just makes it hard to
> remember or pass by.

But there's also the older standard.

behdad

[Connie Bobroff]

And what about future standards? Undoubtedly there will be more.

-Connie

[Behnam Esfahbod ZWNJ]

- There has never been a keyboard layout named "Iranian standard"
before, is it? IIRC our previous releases which based on the older
standard was only named "Persian", right?

- We made sure the new standard is completely backward compatible. So
it's not a problem if user thinks of the old standard.

- Future standards can use any other name that is not confusing. Maybe
there will be a brand for that, like Dvorak. Although I bet there
wouldn't be any new Persian keyboard layout Iranian standard in next
10 years.

- I am okay with adding the standard org/version to the name, but in
my opinion it must be in the parenthesis, so user understands it's
there just for clearance and preventing future confusions, and she
doesn't need to remember it for daily routines.

- What I'm trying to say is that for newbie and average users, even
"Persian - Iranian Standard (ISIRI 9147)" is more user-friendly, and
useful (ie. cross platforms) than "Persian - ISIRI 9147".

-Behnam

--

[Afshar Mohebbi]

I also suggest its name as a Persian name: ماتصا ۹۱۴۷ (read in English
as MATSA 9147). Term ماتصا (MATSA) represent ISIRI in Persian and will
be soon very well-known in Iran.
I think average user will be more comfort with a Persian name like
ماتصا ۹۱۴۷.

Afshar

On Sep 5, 2:08 am, Behnam Esfahbod ZWNJ <beh...@zwnj.org> wrote:
> - There has never been a keyboard layout named "Iranian standard"
> before, is it?  IIRC our previous releases which based on the older
> standard was only named "Persian", right?
>
> - We made sure the new standard is completely backward compatible. So
> it's not a problem if user thinks of the old standard.
>
> - Future standards can use any other name that is not confusing. Maybe
> there will be a brand for that, like Dvorak.  Although I bet there
> wouldn't be any new Persian keyboard layout Iranian standard in next
> 10 years.
>
> - I am okay with adding the standard org/version to the name, but in
> my opinion it must be in the parenthesis, so user understands it's
> there just for clearance and preventing future confusions, and she
> doesn't need to remember it for daily routines.
>
> - What I'm trying to say is that for newbie and average users, even
> "Persian - Iranian Standard (ISIRI 9147)" is more user-friendly, and
> useful (ie. cross platforms) than "Persian - ISIRI 9147".
>
> -Behnam
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Connie Bobroff<conn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And what about future standards? Undoubtedly there will be more.
> > -Connie
>

> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad.esfah...@gmail.com>

[Behnam]

then it has to be
فارسی −ماتصا ۹۱۴۷

[Behnam Esfahbod ZWNJ]

Good idea, but please note that this a localization issue. For example
if you have "Persian - ISIRI 9147" label in the English UI, it's
supposed to be translated to "فارسی - ماتصا ۹۱۴۷" in the Persian one.

As you may already know, it's an (official?) MS policy to not display
any non-English text in the English version of windows, so it's better
to keep it this way in any extension as well.

-Behnam

[Afshar Mohebbi]

yes, I do agree we need an English name too for situation like you
mentioned about MS policy.

**Why I'm receiving your messages in my email mailbox not in [p-c] group?

Afshar