Language and script encoding standards

John Cowan cowan at
Tue Jul 25 00:00:37 CEST 2006

Mark Davis scripsit:

> I didn't understand your message. What I was saying was that
> romanization is more important, typically, than country. That is,
> for fallbacks, the best formulation would have been to put the
> transliteration system before the country, because it typically makes
> a much larger difference in the outcome.

Ah, I see.  My response to that is that neither transliteration scheme
nor national variety is much of a barrier in general, and I doubt it
matters which one you put first.  The language barrier is the biggest,
followed by the script barrier (modulo some really oddball cases: I can
probably read a text in a language closely related to mine better than
my own language in a wholly unknown script).  The exact transliteration
scheme only becomes important when writing automatic transliterators.

When I'm stuck in something boring              John Cowan
where reading would be impossible or            (who loves Asimov too)
rude, I often set up math problems for          cowan at
myself and solve them as a way to pass
the time.      --John Jenkins

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list