[Ltru] Re: Ietf-languages Digest, Vol 50, Issue 15

[CE Whitehead]

>
>The JAC has various issues I need to get them to review. I will include 
>this among them.
>
>There's one scenario I think is of interest: Suppose there are currently 
>only a handful of documents in non-modern Czech (I don't know what the 
>actual situation is) - not enough that anyone feels a particular need to 
>request separate IDs for historical forms. What then? Well, I guess they 
>would use "ces"; that's a little like someone wondering if a letterform is 
>a distinct character and deciding to treat it like a font variant and not 
>requesting a new character in Unicode/ISO 10646. But then suppose later 
>someone discovers some lost library of Old and Middle Czech documents. What 
>then? At that point, they'd probably request separate IDs for the 
>historical form, and they might argue that this is splitting the historical 
>variants from the single category - i.e. that would mean a new ID for the 
>modern language and well as the historical languages, and "ces" would 
>automatically become a macrolanguage.
>
>Of course, the scenario playing out that way depends on users initially 
>deciding to use "ces" for the historical records and not requesting 
>separate IDs, and on the JAC deciding that there was established usage of 
>"ces" for multiple variants. (By analogy, UTC wouldn't necessarily decide 
>that the existing character was ambiguous and that *two* new, unambiguous 
>characters are needed.)
>
>
>Peter

Thanks!

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the best route! 
http://maps.live.com/?icid=hmtag1&FORM=MGAC01