Re: allowing an @modifier for documentlanguage locale-based argument

On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:52:37PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > I think it would be fine to recognize and accept @MODIFIER suffixes as
> > you suggest, but it would probably be safer not to do anything with it,
> > unless or until we are aware of the practical implications.  This could
> > come from users of the Serbian language, for example.
> 
> After reading some BCP 47 related information, such as
>  https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr35/tr35-76/tr35.html
> I am now wondering if we should not have instead a way to specify the
> script, directly, like
> 
> @documentscript latin
> 
> and construct a locale with @modifier for gettext translation retrieval,
> but also construct a BCP 47 locale name for HTML, DocBook and possibly other
> purposes.

I like that idea better, as, on reflection, we have too much tricky code
in texinfo.tex already and that would be much easier to implement in
texinfo.tex.