Encoding scripts in tags: evil or just unpleasant?
John Cowan
cowan at mercury.ccil.org
Thu May 22 22:26:46 CEST 2003
Michael Everson scripsit:
> Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian are, linguistically speaking, closely
> related dialects of the same language. We've got three codes for them
> now, and Bosnian was totally political, and now how many more do you
> want? Let's say they can ALL be written in two scripts. Shall we add
> six more codes to the three we already have?
No. Croatian, meaning by that the kind of Serbo-Croatian they speak in
Croatia (ijekavian), is definitely only written in the Latin alphabet.
> Wrong? Possibly. But I want to know that everybody think this RFC is
> for precisely this thing because I am not sure of that.
Well, I started out in your position and have now moved to approving of
Peter's productive langage-script-country model (where "country" is a
proxy for spelling system, basically).
I think the problem is now well enough understood since the publication
of Peter's papers that we can move past the minimalist position of 1766/3066
to something more detailed.
--
A rabbi whose congregation doesn't want John Cowan
to drive him out of town isn't a rabbi, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
and a rabbi who lets them do it jcowan at reutershealth.com
isn't a man. --Jewish saying http://www.reutershealth.com
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list