Scripts and Language Codes (was RE: Here comes the Yiddish)

[Peter_Constable@sil.org]

On 12/04/2002 06:09:44 AM "Jon Hanna" wrote:

>> This is what <script="Ogam"> tags are for. This is what ISO 15924 is
>> for. I don't understand why this isn't clear.
>
>I was trying to say that I agree with you that RFC3066 codes shouldn't be
>registered for scripts. I can see a point in a successor that encoded
>language and script together (since they do after all co-exist in the same
>piece of text) but I can see arguments against as well. As such I would be
>interested in views on such.

Michael is saying more than just he doesn't want to have to register codes
to distinguish between scripts. The implication of what he's saying is that
e.g. xml:lang should distinguish language *only*, and that a different
metadata attribute should be used for distinguishing between writing
systems and orthographies.


BTW, I really would encourage people to look at my IUC 21 paper if they
haven't already (http://www.sil.org/silewp/abstract.asp?ref=2002-003). It's
long, and it definitely isn't all correct. My main intent was to get people
thinking about the issues, and to make a stab at working toward a clear
analysis of the issues.



- Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable

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