Re: Language for taxonomic names, redux
Yury Tarasievich <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 24/02/17 13:15, Arthur Reutenauer wrote: >> What's the problem with having a tag for that taxonomy thing? That's a >> highly specialised language, Latin-derived. And when there'll happen a >> Wikipedia in it, we'll see all sorts of "hello andies". > > There can’t be a Wikipedia in [la-linnaeus], that’s not what has been > discussed. How would you write any full sentence in it? That's not my point. Forget the Wikipedia. What's the problem with having a tag for that taxonomy thing? That's a highly specialised language, Latin-derived. I see all kinds of requirements appearing suddenly: 'what about country codes' or 'what about speech synthesisers'. Are those really relevant to the process? What about those requirements with regard to some of the codes already assigned? E.g., codes for obsolete orthographies (some of the French, I believe?). Should those codes be scrapped? How about the primitive (not 'functionally complete' -- don't know that term in English) languages? -Yury _______________________________________________ Ietf-languages mailing list [email protected] http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages