Here comes the Yiddish
Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:04:59 -0600

On 12/03/2002 02:49:13 PM Michael Everson wrote:

>>So what about the "de-DE-1996" et al codes that you approved a few
>>months ago?  "Orthographic differences are not language codes",
>>after all.
>Script codes are intended to be an attribute of a script tag, and for
>the specific needs of modern spell-checkers was the deciding and
>practical business case. There is no script code for 1996. That was a
>language reform.

That was *not* a language reform. It was an *orthography* reform. Nobody
changed the way they express themselves linguistically.

>I do not want us to go down the road of making a "language code" for
>Portuguese written in the Arabic script.

If RFC 3066 were replaced with something that referenced ISO 15924 and
provided a clear syntax and semantics, you wouldn't have to review requests
for something like this. (And does anyone have a need for Portuguese
written in Arabic script? Not everything that would be possible would
necessarily be needed; all that matters, though, is that if something is
used then it's clear to all what it means.)

- Peter

Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485