Ietf-languages Digest, Vol 81, Issue 11

[Mark Davis ⌛]

I think all we really need is hepburn at this point. Like everything, there
will be subvariants, but until and unless people have a need for them, we
should focus on the principal requirement.

Mark


On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 17:31, Frank Bennett <biercenator at gmail.com> wrote:

> Doug:
>
> > Thus my original question remains: in what way does the Description
> > field "Hepburn romanization" make it unclear whether the subtag refers
> > to a specific variety of Hepburn or for a blanket covering all of them;
> > and to the extent any confusion exists, how critical a tagging problem
> > does this cause?
> ...
>
> Randy:
>
> Your own posts in this thread suggest that it is at least ambiguous between
> the romanizations known as "Hepburn" romanizations following the same
> principles, whatever those might be.  All I'm suggesting is that if it is
> to be
> a catch-all (of either kind) then we should be explicit.  We have other
> examples like this, such as "gem", and I have argued that they do have
> a legitimate (if highly limited) use.  But since no one else seems to be
> concerned about this, I'll shut up.
>
> Me:
>
> If it will serve the cause, I'll be happy to make two further filings,
> based on the transliteration rules of two variants of Hepburn that are
> well-defined and available on the Net -- the system from J.C.
> Hepburn's 1886 dictionary, and the system used by the Library of
> Congress.  For my own immediate purposes this level of specificity
> won't be needed, but having subvariants in place from the start would
> make it very clear that further ones can be registered, and that
> greater precsion is possible where it is required.
>
> It's really not much trouble.  Shall I go ahead and prepare those
> additional submissions?
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20090905/1932bc28/attachment.htm