<div dir="ltr">Hoi,<br>This is NOT the same Pinyin, it is only called the same.. My understanding is that we should not have homonyms in the registery.<br>Thanks,<br><font color="#888888"> Gerard</font><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Kent Karlsson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kent.karlsson14@comhem.se">kent.karlsson14@comhem.se</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">Doug Ewell wrote:<br>
<br>
> As mentioned earlier, while Pinyin is used primarily and overwhelmingly<br>
> for Mandarin Chinese, it does have use for other languages.<br>
<br>
</div>For instance Cantonese: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Cantonese_Pinyin" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Cantonese_Pinyin</a>.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> I don't<br>
> necessarily propose adding them all as Prefix fields (we can do that<br>
> later anyway if necessary), but I'd rather not see lots of text in the<br>
> proposal that attempts to restrict Pinyin to Mandarin.<br>
<br>
</div>I think it is a bad idea to have this variant for the macrolanguage<br>
code 'zh'. 'cmn-Latn-pinyin', 'yue-Latn-pinyin' (4646bis), ok. But not<br>
'zh-Latn-pinyin' as the latter is ambiguous (unless one sees 'zh' as an<br>
alias for 'cmn'...).<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> It's not as<br>
> though we were talking about using 'boont' with Russian.<br>
<br>
</div>???<br>
<br>
/kent k<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ietf-languages mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no">Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no</a><br>
<a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages" target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>