You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Does it make sense to align ICU4X with CLDR/ICU4C?
According to CLDR, only "islamic-civil" should use July 16, 622 CE, but interestingly ICU4C also uses July 16, 622 CE for "islamic-umalqura". When calling ICU4C through Intl.DateTimeFormat:
The calendar is computed, by the majority of the Muslim world, starting at sunset of Thursday, July 15, 622 c. e. (Julian), the year of Mohammed’ s migration to Medina from Mecca. 2 The introduction of the calendar is often attributed to the Caliph ‘Umar in 639 c. e., but there is evidence that it was in use before his succession. In essence, Muslims count r. d. 227015 = Friday, July 16, 622 c. e. (Julian) as the beginning of the Islamic year 1, that is, as Muḥarram 1, a. h. 3 1, and thus we define islamic-epoch def () = fixed-from-julian 622 c. e. july 16 (7.1)
CLDR and ICU4C both use July 15, 622 CE as the start of the epoch for the Islamic observational calendar:
Whereas ICU4X uses July 16, 622 CE:
icu4x/utils/calendrical_calculations/src/islamic.rs
Lines 7 to 9 in 5e7585c
Does it make sense to align ICU4X with CLDR/ICU4C?
According to CLDR, only "islamic-civil" should use July 16, 622 CE, but interestingly ICU4C also uses July 16, 622 CE for "islamic-umalqura". When calling ICU4C through
Intl.DateTimeFormat
:In comparison when implementing
Temporal
using ICU4X:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: