On 29 March 2015 at 16:33, sam.ua <sam.ua@zoho.com> wrote:

Kyiv is and will always be the proper transliterated version of our capital.

This is a question of translation, NOT transliteration. The tz project endeavors to use the name as it is actively used and spelled in the English language, regardless of how speakers of other languages would transliterate their name into the English alphabet (e.g., we use "Rome" instead of "Roma", "Athens" instead of "Athena", etc.)

Whether "rightly" or "wrongly" according to one's own geopolitical alignment, the English spelling is still "Kiev", so that is what we use here. Questions about place names localized for other languages should be directed at the CLDR.

On 31 March 2015 at 15:04, Matt Johnson <mj1856@hotmail.com> wrote:

I won't address the political statements, as that sort of discussion is off topic for this mailing list.

Quite.

Now, that said, I'm not entirely sure that it wouldn't be possible for the tz database to consider "Europe/Kyiv" as a name change from "Europe/Kiev" with a compatibility link. Wasn't a similar change made for Asia/Calcutta => Asia/Kolkata ? Or do different rules apply since the name was officially changed by the government in 2001? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolkata#Etymology)

I suppose as long as English-language sources would actively use the new spelling, we would assume the spelling has changed de facto, rather than de jure in the case of Kolkata. But either way would work. I suspect Paul is quite reluctant to get involved here, but I'd be interested in any insights he might have to share about the Kolkata change.

That said, if this is going to be a repetitively contentious issue, it could conceivably be better to offer both spellings. But even doing that would be seen as a political statement, which we consciously and carefully strive to avoid making.

--
Tim Parenti