Re: Forms for July 2017 changes to ISO 15924
Mark Davis ☕️ <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJ2xs_GogPG++1RE4NXMwpj2M+pE3Ath3ReOHEKwWsq8UoEG7A@mail.gmail.com> |
Formally, yes. In reality, clearly has *never* been the case. ISO will not encode two different codes for the names "Arabische Schrift" and "Arab Script". In some sense I don't care. But in another sense, encoding names that do not help the users of the registry distinguish between scripts just looks like showing off. Mark (https://twitter.com/mark_e_davis) On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:25 AM, Michael Everson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 31 Jul 2017, at 18:16, Peter Constable <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I was not asking "what are they doing here". My only concern is that, if > we are providing a phonetic transcription of a language name, that it > should be the autoglossonym as pronounced by a native speaker. > > ISO 15924 specifies codes for the representation of the names of scripts. > > Michael Everson > _______________________________________________ > 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