Subject: [Ltru] Re: script tag for IPA

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:12:42 -0700

I note that the LTRU 2.0 charter says to consider possibilities for 
tagging transliterations and transcriptions, specifically in the context 
of extlangs and variants (I would add "or extensions").  It does *not* 
say we should try to twist the arm of various ISO MA's and RA's to make 
their standards fit our needs.  If IPA does not fit the ISO 15924 
definition of "script," or if the Registrar and/or RA disagrees with 
adding it, then that is that and it is not our business to change that.

We saw something similar in LTRU 1.0 with ISO 3166.  If ISO 3166/MA does 
not find it within their policy to assign official country code elements 
for non-country entities, such as the European Union or OPEC or NATO or 
what have you, that is their call.  We can and should ask them to take 
stability measures that will not adversely affect their ability to 
assign new code elements, but asking them to change the scope of the 
standard goes well beyond that.  We can suggest, but I don't think we 
should flog.

(Note that I completely avoided the question of whether IPA is a flavor 
of Latin or a separate script; this was wholly intentional.)

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
RFC 4645  *  UTN #14

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:22:51 -0700

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

> This is part of the general problem of transliteration/transcription, 
> which is not (yet) handled by the RFC 4646 framework.  The best 
> permanent answer is probably to create a -t-xxxx standardized 
> extension to 4646, as provided for, and to create a registration 
> authority to register and maintain codes for different 
> transliterations.

+1 with gusto.  This is the best use case for extensions that I have 
seen yet.  Most people agree that they are different in nature from 
either language, script, or the kind of "linguistic variety" usually 
associated with variants, and are too well-understood to be relegated to 
private-use.

Remove-from-right fallback should not be the main determinant of which 
subtags carry which information.  If that is so important, we should not 
have spent so much time developing a matching draft that offers better 
schemes.

---

From: Addison Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:59:48 -0700

+1

-- 
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.