Care to explain why you think it's infeasible? Then one could provide targeted counter-optimism ;)

I don't see what's infeasible about it. It doesn't seem too different from .po files (gettext catalogs) meshed with hooks for post-processing as would see in e.g. a handlebars, both of which have individually found great adoption.

> why you think it's infeasible?

GP based his opinion on the assumption that this spec new and no implementations for it exist.

ICU4C and ICU4J have implementations. We also have a JS polyfill and will be working on ICU4X impl this quarter.

Unicode consortium already manages a ton of language specs. If there's any group of folks I'd trust to understand languages (natural or otherwise), it's them.

This is the one. Think of all the "misconceptions developer have about X" lists, I trust Unicode to have encountered (if not written) all of them. The people behind unicode are thorough.

I mean they have hieroglyphs, some of which have plurals: https://www.unicode.org/charts/nameslist/n_13000.html

I've been using this format for almost 10 years, and I only see increasing adoption. Why would I be pessimistic?