stq vs. frs
cowan at ccil.org
Tue Apr 29 06:04:02 CEST 2008
Frank Ellermann scripsit:
> That doesn't fit for (frs) alternate names
> | Ostfriesisch, Saterlandic Frisian, Seeltersk Frisian
I agree. The latter two are bogus.
What we have here, I think, is that FRS was used in the 14th Edition
indiscriminately for Saterfrisian and Ostfriesisch Low German, and the
details haven't been completely sorted out yet.
> Looking into a document it should be easy to distinguish it, e.g.,
> I won't grok "stq", but get the drift of any written "nds".
Take a look at the stq Wikipedia, then. It looks Frisian-ish to me.
> It would be strange to deviate from the Frisian fr? scheme for
> "s" in frs, the set fri, frr, frs, fry belongs together.
I agree, but we are dealing with historical accident here.
> The "East Frisian" nds dialect is a dialect.
Or not. It doesn't have "an armey un a flot", that's for sure.
My confusion is rapidly waxing John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing: cowan at ccil.org
I'd use DTDs http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
If they had local trees --
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.
More information about the Ietf-languages