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