Script code for IPA
Scripts2 at sesame.demon.co.uk
Fri Apr 11 02:56:51 CEST 2003
Actually I'd missed one rather obvious point in my argument:
I had assumed that IPA _did_ have a script code.
[Thread: RE: Why not? [Re: [Fwd]: Response to Mark's message]]
If various sorts of Japanese script situations have script codes,
which are not mutually exclusive, why can't IPA as well?
I think that it was Michael Everson that mentioned the problem of
THETA not being a LATIN character, which failed to make IPA a subset
of Latin script.
If there was an IPA script code, software could be programmed to
recognise that when "Ipal" (or whatever) was used, this would ensure
that "IPA behaviour" was introduced, rather than having to rely on
just recognising a mixture of "Latin Behaviour" and "Greek behaviour"
which could be unpredicatable, e.g. in sorting etc.
How do we cope with that otherwise?
PS: In addition, the use of ISO 15924 (Codes for representation of
names of scripts) won't be limited just to use in RFC3066bis, but
could find further use elsewhere.
Further, one could also put various notes into any new registration
for an IPA script code, stating - use this only when it is explicitly
IPA that is being dealt with.
In message <29724 at sesame.demon.co.uk> Scripts2 at sesame.demon.co.uk (John Clews) writes:
> In message <NDBBLCBLIMDOPKMOPHLHAEIBFAAA.jon at spin.ie> "Jon Hanna" writes:
> > > In message <email@example.com> Michael
> > > Everson writes:
> > > > At 07:23 -0400 2003-04-10, John Cowan wrote:
> > > > >Michael Everson scripsit:
> > > > >
> > > > >> IPA is a special use of Latin, but it's still Latin.
> > > > >
> > > > >Perhaps what is needed is a notion of "script subsets", which would
> > > > >include Hans, Hant, and Ipal. In this way we could clearly
> > > discriminate
> > > > >between, say, English in ordinary orthography (en) and in IPA
> > > transcription
> > > > >(en-ipal).
> > > >
> > > > But why?
> > >
> > > But why not? Surely it is useful to make such distinctions sometimes,
> > > especially the example given of Ipal.
> > The possibility of a need for such fine-grained identifiers for scripts
> > would further complicate the language codes above the complication of
> > dealing with scripts at all.
> > Another justification for my view that we should deal with the two
> > separately?
> Absolutely we should deal with the two concepts separately, but
> sometimes they need to be brought together.
> Perhaps we are misunderstanding each other.
> Each _is_ separate (in two different standards, ISO 639 and ISO
> 15924). Each can be (or could be) brought together in ISO 3066bis,
> through subtag mechanisms.
> Just as elements from each of ISO 639 and ISO 3166 can be brought
> together in ISO 3066bis, through subtag mechanisms, already.
> I'd certainly want to see that distinction in some cases.
> Best regards
> John Clews
> John Clews,
> Director and Editor
> Keytempo directory of musicians
> Keytempo Limited (Information Management),
> 8 Avenue Rd, Harrogate, HG2 7PG, United Kingdom.
> Tel: 01423 888 432 (mobile: 07766 711 395)
> Email: Scripts2 at sesame.demon.co.uk
> Web: http://www.keytempo.com
More information about the Ietf-languages