Re: Forms for July 2017 changes to ISO 15924

Adding a name in a core language to help distinguish an entry from others
is good.

But is "na²¹ɕi³³ to³³ba²¹" really the way the script is really is spelled
in a native language using that script?

Mark

(https://twitter.com/mark_e_davis)

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Doug Ewell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Peter Constable wrote:
>
> > The entries for Naxi Dongba and Naxi Geba have phonemic
> > transcriptions. I'm not sure where those came from. Does anyone know
> > whether those are Naxi pronunciations of the names, or Mandarin
> > pronunciations?
>
> To answer one possible interpretation of Peter's question, which is
> "what are they doing here?", the script subtag 'Nkgb' for Nakhi Geba has
> had one of these since it was added in 2009:
>
> Description: 'Na-'Khi ²Ggŏ-¹baw
>
> RFC 5646 says Description fields are not supposed to be used for
> transcriptions and translations, but also says that we try to match them
> to the reference name(s) in the core standard (language, extlang,
> region, script). So we already have Lengua de señas catalana and
> Llengua de Signes Catalana, and finlandssvenskt teckenspråk and
> suomenruotsalainen viittomakieli, and 'Na-'Khi ²Ggŏ-¹baw, and the
> current proposals add "na²¹ɕi³³ to³³ba²¹ and na²¹ɕi³³
> gʌ²¹ba²¹. In all likelihood we would not have added any of these if
> they weren't in the ISO standard.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages