"Logic" for describing IPA as a script

[Peter_Constable at sil.org]

Michael Everson wrote on 04/11/2003 12:14:45 PM:

> >It doesn't mean that they want to describe IPA as a script
> >particular, just that they want a script code for it, and have cited
> >various user needs.
>
> We give script codes to scripts. I can write out any number of texts
> and you would be unable to determine whether it was IPA or Latin
> until some stray letter wandered in.

I don't think that's relevant. The text "chat" could be several different
languages, but that doesn't imply that those languages don't need to be
distinguished.


> No, it just doesn't make logical
> sense at all.

You're saying that you don't see any valid reason for having a code for
phonetic transcription? I hope not, as I (and a large number of linguists)
have a very really need, and I *don't* want to have to register hundreds of
individual tags for phonetic representations of as many languages. I'm
convinced of the need in ISO 15924 for something for phonetic
transcription; the only thing I haven't decided is whether there is a need
to have distinct IDs for different phonetic traditions (though I am
starting to convince myself the answer is no).



- Peter


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

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