No subject


Tue Nov 18 23:43:20 CET 2008


complete or the mails with the most compelling arguments) the motivation =
was
to move from the private Qaai to a public code. Although in general =
there
should not be a reliance on private codes, until I understand a use case
where Zinh is needed for labeling shared or transmitted text, this seems =
to
be a case where private is just fine. (My 2 cents.)

As I said, my intent is not to have an extended debate, it is a done =
deal
now. Some enlightenment would be nice if there are use cases for it.

tex

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
[mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Michael =
Everson
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:35 AM
To: ietflang IETF Languages Discussion
Subject: Re: Zinh - Code for inherited script and governance of ISO =
15924

On 26 Feb 2009, at 07:44, Lang G=E9rard wrote:

> I completely agree.

With what?

> In my opinion the real question is:
> "If it had not been the case that:
> (i)-ISO 15924 Registration Authority has been delegated by ISO to =20
> Unicode;

Oh boy! A consipiracy theory!

> (ii)-the proposition to add inside ISO 15924 a new entry named "Code =20
> for inherited script/codet pour =E9criture herit=E9e", with code =20
> elements ("Zinh", 994), is practically uniquely in the interest of =20
> Unicode and does not clearly  qualify as a good candidate for an =20
> entry inside ISO 15924  (Because, in particular, ISO 15924 title is =20
> "Codes for the representation of names of scripts", so that entries =20
> of ISO 15924 must be "names of scripts", where a script is defined =20
> as"Set of characters used for the written form of one or more =20
> languages", so that a script must be used to write some language)

Incorrect. In the first place there are several of these "special" =20
tags registered already:

Zinh
994
Code for inherited script
codet pour =E9criture h=E9rit=E9e
Inherited
2009-02-23

Zmth
995
Mathematical notation
notation math=E9matique
=97
2007-11-26

Zsym
996
Symbols
symboles
=97
2007-11-26

Zxxx
997
Code for unwritten documents
codet pour les documents non =E9crites
=97
2007-06-13

Zyyy
998
Code for undetermined script
codet pour =E9criture ind=E9termin=E9e
Common
2004-05-29

Zzzz
999
Code for uncoded script
codet pour =E9criture non cod=E9e
Unknown
2006-10-10

Some of these were used in Unicode, and have, in the field before the =20
date, Property Value Aliases (Inherited, Common, Unknown). The script =20
property previously used two Private-Use codes, namely Qaac for Coptic =20
(now replaced by Copt), and Qaai (now replaced by Zinh).

> WOULD SUCH A REQUEST HAVE ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS ?"

Kindly do not shout.

As Registrar of ISO 15924, I should like to point out that we have a =20
committee that decides these things, which includes people who are not =20
members of the Consortium.

> And if the answer to this question is CERTAINLY NOT ?

As I recall Mark Davis proposed Polytonic Greek and IPA to be scripts =20
in ISO 15924, and these proposals were rejected in favour of subtags =20
here.

Zinh was accepted on foot of the arguments put forward for it.

> I will not add any other comment.

Please do not.

> Cordialement.

Maybe next time?

> G=E9rard LANG

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages



More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list