Re: Forms for July 2017 changes to ISO 15924
Mark Davis ☕️ <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJ2xs_Fr6cA6PbKrn0mDLqeVwTytfLY5JeQ5BcjGASbuRn-y+A@mail.gmail.com> |
The purpose in the registry of a name for ascript is to enable people to distinguish it from other scripts. So the question is whether any significant community would be unable to distinguish Naxi Geba from other scripts, but would be able if "na²¹ɕi³³ to³³ba²¹" were another description. Mark (https://twitter.com/mark_e_davis) On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 7:17 PM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Mark Davis ☕️ <[email protected]> > wrote: > > But is "na²¹ɕi³³ to³³ba²¹" really the way the script is really is spelled >> in a native language using that script? >> > > Unlikely. But though all languages have endonyms, 90% cannot be written > in native script (because there is none), so that is no objection. > > -- > John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan [email protected] > A rabbi whose congregation doesn't want to drive him out of town isn't > a rabbi, and a rabbi who lets them do it isn't a man. --Jewish saying > > _______________________________________________ Ietf-languages mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages