ontology nits

Yury Tarasievich yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Sun Aug 31 09:01:20 CEST 2008


Mark Davis wrote:
...
> But then we'd be missing the umbrella term for both, which is what 
> most people would really like to use. (It'd be like having a term for 
> "British English" and one for "American English" and one for 
> Australian (&c.), but no umbrella term for "English" (of any variant). 
> So we'd end up back yet again adding what we should have added in the 
> first place:
>
> be-akadem
Please, don't complicate matters by introducing an unusual truncations 
or transliterations of the word "academy" -- makes it unrecognisable in 
both worlds. Locally, when words of "acad" root are abbreviated, it's 
down to the four letters. So, the untruncated English "academy" is good 
-- other matters aside.

Now, I think cluttering the namespace with umbrellas is, for Belarusian 
specifics, quite impractical. Also, as it was pointed out, the "academy" 
isn't quite descriptive "per se". So, if by the registry guidelines it 
couldn't be *only* the umbrella "-academy" in the first place, then it 
is even less acceptable if already having the specific pointers of the 
"1959acad (no transliteration!)" nature.

I admit, of course, it might be useful w/r to the English tagspace. I 
won't venture an opinion there.

-Yury



More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list