Pinyin

[David Starner]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:21 PM, John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> wrote:
> Randy Presuhn scripsit:
>
>> Now, a question.  Consider bo-Latn-TW-pinyin.  Would that be  Tibetan
>> as used in Tiawan in an orthography that looks something like Hanyu Pinyin,
>> or Tibetan in an orthography that looks something like Tongyong pinyin?
>
> Who cares?  It is complete bollocks in either case, as much so as nv-DK or tlh-AQ.

km-US and tr-DE make sense; even if bo-TW doesn't exist today, it
doesn't seem that unlikely a combination to appear in the future.