datapacrat at gmail.com
Sun Sep 15 02:43:40 CEST 2013
It seems worth mentioning that the much more widely-used, and much more
distinct from English/Latin script, International Phonetic Alphabet is
listed in the subtag registry as a variant rather than an independent
On Saturday, 14 September 2013, Kent Karlsson wrote:
> Is your (apparent) support for this variant subtag to be interpreted
> as that you have given up the idea of encoding Unifon as a script
> separate from the Latin script? (Cmp.
> http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/n4195.pdf.) I mean, if Unifon
> is encoded as a separate script, it will have a script subtag, and
> there is no need for a variant subtag.
> /Kent K
> >> That¹s correct: the Œfonuni¹ subtag, if approved, could be used to
> >> form any language tag, including both fewer (en-unifon) and more
> >> (en-Latn-NZ-unifon) subtags that matched the Prefix field(s) in the
> >> as well as other well-formed (but non-sensical) tags
> >> Any reason why Œfonuni¹ would be the subtag you proposed instead of
> > Well, just because we have other phonetic subtags: fonipa, fonupa,
> > I guess there'd be no particular reason to insist on fonuni rather than
> > unifon.
> > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
> Ietf-languages mailing list
Thank you for your time,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages