Japanese transliteration: ja-Latn-hepburn
doug at ewellic.org
Wed Sep 9 14:18:17 CEST 2009
CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:
> I still think that [pinyin] and [wadegile] can serve as precedents for
> how we treat [hepburn] ! But I'm not sure I see a consensus on this
For Chinese, we differentiated (Hanyu) Pinyin from Wade-Giles with two
separate variants. For Japanese, we are talking about differentiating
Hepburn from Kunrei-shiki from Nihon-shiki with three separate variants.
I don't think there is much debate over that.
The question is whether the variant 'hepburn' for our purposes means
only Revised Hepburn, in which case we would need a fourth and fifth
variant under "ja-Latn" to denote Traditional and Modified Hepburn
respectively, or whether 'hepburn' means any variety of Hepburn, in
which case we would need three new variants under "ja-Latn-hepburn" to
distinguish between the three varieties. This is the approach I prefer,
because it would still be possible to say "any old Hepburn," which I
think will be a common use case since the varieties are so similar. But
this is where I think there may still be differences of opinion.
This is not an issue we dealt with when discussing 'pinyin' and
'wadegile'. "zh-Latn-pinyin" explicitly means Chinese in Hanyu Pinyin,
according to the registration form at
currently there is no way to tag Tongyong Pinyin.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
More information about the Ietf-languages