Alemanic & Swiss German
petercon at microsoft.com
Mon Dec 4 22:37:30 CET 2006
Joan Spanne and I will follow up on this.
From: mark.edward.davis at gmail.com [mailto:mark.edward.davis at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 1:19 PM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages at iana.org; ISO639-3 at sil.org
Subject: Re: Alemanic & Swiss German
Ok, so far so good. It sounds like we agree that the reference name for gsw in 639-3 should be "Swiss German", and that that should be the first name listed in 639-2. What would be the right channels in ISO to get this fixed?
I would also question that "Alemanic" should even be mentioned, since I really don't think it is common at all to refer to it as "Alemanic" (except mistakenly), but that is clearly of somewhat lesser importance.
On 12/4/06, Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft.com> wrote:
It is not the case that 639-3 lists "Alemanic" as the *sole * name for gsw; it lists "Swiss German" as well.
However, it does appear that the current draft does use "Alemanic" as the reference name, which I agree is a bad choice since it is misleading, and that "Swiss German" would be a better choice: even if the appropriateness of "Alemanic" is in question, "Swiss German" is not and, among English-language names, is the most commonly used.
From: mark.edward.davis at gmail.com [mailto: mark.edward.davis at gmail.com <mailto:mark.edward.davis at gmail.com> ] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
The only reason it does have to do with LTRU is that we are considering adding 639-3, and 639-3 lists "Alemanic" as the *sole* name for gsw, which is clearly incorrect. Thus it raises the issue of whether to take the 639-3 names wholesale, or allow corrections.
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages