Re: Click letters in ISO 639-3 and Registry

Arthur Reutenauer wrote:

> I agree to all the names you’ve suggested in that email, and to not
> use ASCII fallbacks in the registry.

Thanks. That's one. :)  Hoping a few more people will chime in.

> What about ASCII fallbacks? We will need to give the RA something to put in
> their Latin-1–restricted files. They are currently using ( | || ! ) which
> seem OK, and ( ‡ ) which is awful and not even Latin-1. Can we recommend
> that they use ( | || |= ! ) plus U+0027 for the glottal-ejective-whatever
> apostrophe?

> Actually, they’re only using ‡ once in the UTF-8 file, in ASCII it’s
> =/ which to be consistent we could recommend replacing by =| instead.
> I agree with all the rest.

Yes, you are correct, 639-3 has been using =/ (equal, slash) and not /=
(slash, equal) as I wrote earlier. I am fine with suggesting =| as the
ASCII fallback for ǂ.

[gku] already had the correct spelling with ǂ, [huc] was changed from
=/ to ‡ (double dagger), and [aue] was left as =/.

Ethnologue is currently listing "‡Kx’au||’ein" (double dagger and
two ASCII bars) as a dialect of "Ju|’hoansi" (ASCII bar).
 
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org


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