Request: Language Code "de-DE-1996"
Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:53:01 -0500
On 04/24/2002 05:43:33 PM "J.Wilkes" wrote:
>Since orthography and regional pecuilarities are IMHO orthogonal, we can't
>get a clean tree structure. But we can get a tree structure with dead
>branches, or a cyclic graph with links.
>de German language (country and orthography
>de-DE German language, German vocabulary (orthography
>de-AT German language, Austrian vocabulary (orthography
>de-CH German language, Swiss vocabulary (orthography
>de-1901 German language, 1901 orthography (country unspecified)
>de-1901-DE German language, 1901 orthography, German vocabulary
>de-1901-AT German language, 1901 orthography, Austrian vocabulary
>de-1901-CH German language, 1901 orthography, Swiss vocabulary
>de-1996 German language, 1996 orthography (country unspecified)
>de-1996-DE German language, 1996 orthography, German vocabulary
>de-1996-AT German language, 1996 orthography, Austrian vocabulary
>de-1996-CH German language, 1996 orthography, Swiss vocabulary
>There is certainly a more formal and precise notation for this, but I hope
>my intention is obvious.
>When interpreting these tags, you get three values; when choosing these
>tags, you can omit parts which you don't know or are uncertain, and still
>produce a valid and unambigous tag.
>> But if every distinct tag *does* have a
>> distinct denotation and distinct purpose from every other, then let's
>> it clear what that else so that they *can* provide interoperability.
>> all I'm asking.
>If i misunderstood you and my posting was pointless, please exuse me
>wasting your time with my posting.
No, you have above provided a distinct denotation for each distinct tag,
and you have made it clear what that denotation is in each case. That's
what I think should be required for all tags.
>But you will also get documents where the author does not care about the
>orthography (s)he uses, e.g. on travels or in interviews, knowing the text
>will be corrected and arranged later.
I had certainly allowed for that in my model. I wasn't meaning to say that
*all* content is written with intent to follow exactly one spelling
convention; only that I would think all *localised* content (i.e.
specifically constrained in terms of parameters like vocabulary to fit
users in a particular domain) will be written with intent to follow exactly
one spelling convention. Again, maybe I'm mistaken in thinking that's
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485