ISO 639 - New item approved - N'Ko

Doug Ewell dewell at
Fri Jun 9 08:46:59 CEST 2006

Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:

> Mine preference would be either
> a) always "flatten" to 0027 or
> c) use exactly what was used in the source standard, and, when what 
> the
>   source standard uses is arguably incorrect, notify that standard's
>   maintainer so the error can be corrected.  With luck, and time, this
>   would achieve the same result as "b", but with less confusion.

I believe we had more or less settled on (c) in the initial registry, 
and it worked fine until ISO 639 came along with a different spelling of 
N'Ko (apostrophically speaking) from the one already taken from ISO 
15924 for the script subtag.  That was really what broke the spell.  I 
had even learned to sleep nights after adding "Gwich´in" to the 
Registry, with its awful acute accent.

Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list