ISO 639 - New item approved - N'Ko
Doug Ewell
dewell at adelphia.net
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
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list