This issue is to track the work on "example" lists of given names for use in examples in specs.
Pull #74 includes my attempt to address this, but it somehow seems unsatisfying. Here are the options for how to address:
No list, just instructions. @r12a's current text omits a list in favor of providing instructions to spec authors.
Pros: Simple; doesn't introduce cultural issues
Cons: Spec writers must find names and must provide diversity on their own; may not solve the problem
Simple list. This is #74's approach. Provides a list of female and male names, one each per English alphabet letter (in this list, the first name is generally-female and second generally-male, although we note that some names are indeterminate):
Pros: Spec authors can just use items from the list
Cons: Very limited list; doesn't contain examples of important variations; doesn't deal with the fact that personal names are not used in the same way in e.g. Chinese, Japan, Vietnam, (insert long list of cultures here); name choices are arguable
Female/Male lists Split lists by gender identity and make each longer and more diverse. For example:
Pros: Spec authors can just use items from the lists; better separation of female/male; lists are open-ended and can add diversity over time
Cons: May still omit important variations; still structured around Western expectations
Geographical lists Make lists by region.
North America and Western Europe: Alice, Bob, Jean-François, etc.
Central/Eastern Europe: Slobodan, Yevgeny, etc.
Middle East/North Africa: Mohamad, Uriel, Wissam, etc.
Central Asia:names from places such as Azerbaijan, Georgia, Tajikistan, etc.Sub-Saharan Africa:names from languages such as Igbo, Swahili, Xhosa, etc.Indian Subcontinent:names from the various cultures and writing systems of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri LankaSoutheast Asia:names from Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc.East Asia:CJK namesOceania:Australia, Kiribati, Vanuatu, etc.South America:Spanish, Portuguese, indigenous names
Pros: Open-ended; makes diversity of choices clear
Cons: Much more work to create and maintain lists
Per-country lists Make lists by country/region or culture. Probably this should be done by choosing the most popular names in each country based on internet searches or the like.
DE: Berta, Felix, Margarete, Norbert, etc.
US: Alice, Bob, etc.
UK: Richard, William, Kate, etc.
CN: Qiang, Xiaoxia, etc. Note that given names are never used in isolation by Chinese people. Localized examples include...
Pros: Wide range of diversity; Can include additional per-country/per-culture notes and localized example names;
Cons: Overkill? Spec authors may find a long list challenging to pick from; Significantly more effort to maintain lists; more care needed to ensure specific groups are included and that names are representative
In teleconference discussed going with Option 4, including notes about specific name usage (notably Chinese and Japanese). Use UN M.49 regions vs. arbitrary list where practicable.
This issue is to track the work on "example" lists of given names for use in examples in specs.
Pull #74 includes my attempt to address this, but it somehow seems unsatisfying. Here are the options for how to address:
Pros: Simple; doesn't introduce cultural issues Cons: Spec writers must find names and must provide diversity on their own; may not solve the problem
Pros: Spec authors can just use items from the list Cons: Very limited list; doesn't contain examples of important variations; doesn't deal with the fact that personal names are not used in the same way in e.g. Chinese, Japan, Vietnam, (insert long list of cultures here); name choices are arguable
Pros: Spec authors can just use items from the lists; better separation of female/male; lists are open-ended and can add diversity over time Cons: May still omit important variations; still structured around Western expectations
Pros: Open-ended; makes diversity of choices clear Cons: Much more work to create and maintain lists
Pros: Wide range of diversity; Can include additional per-country/per-culture notes and localized example names; Cons: Overkill? Spec authors may find a long list challenging to pick from; Significantly more effort to maintain lists; more care needed to ensure specific groups are included and that names are representative