Duplicate Busters: Survey #2

Doug Ewell doug at ewellic.org
Fri Aug 1 15:35:36 CEST 2008


Kent Karlsson <kent dot karlsson14 at comhem dot se> wrote:

> I do **NOT** agree with the position that removing diacritial marks 
> would be "slightly different typography". It is a difference in 
> spelling, much the same as differences in spelling that you excluded 
> from your list ["(such as Kirghiz vs. Kyrgyz, or Dhivehi vs. Divehi)"] 
> and thus want to keep as multiple names.

Kent is right here, and I phrased that poorly.  Of course, the presence 
or absence of diacritical marks may (depending on language and writing 
system) represent a change in spelling, or even meaning (Spanish 'ano' 
vs. 'año').

What I meant to point out was that diacritical marks are sometimes 
removed, not as an intentional change in spelling, but rather  as a 
typographical convenience, or out of concern that the correct character 
won't be available or rendered correctly.  This may or may not be 
justified given the circumstances.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ



More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list