> From: ISO JAC Voting Member List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Rebecca
> S. Guenther
> My point was not concerning the identifier, but that it was such a
> politically charged issue. Those arguments that there was no such
thing
> as Serbo-Croatian could surface again if we were to introduce it.
So, for that, I would think we can say that there are legacy materials
that have already been classified in this generic way, and a
corresponding ID is needed.
And there are still current usage scenarios where there is a need to
maintain language resources that don't distinguish between these
languages. There was an article in MultiLingual Computing magazine a
couple of years ago that IIRC made exactly that point (I don't have a
copy at hand to check, but I'm pretty sure that was one of the points
made --
http://www.multilingual.com/FMPro?-db=back%20issues&-format=backissues%2
fdetail.htm&-lay=cgi&-sortfield=Magazine&-sortorder=descend&-max=100&-re
cid=108&-token=now&-findall=)
We need to make clear that our language identifiers are not social or
political statements; they are pieces of IT infrastructure provided in
response to user needs, which are divers.
> Is there any other way to refer to it, like add some parenthetical
> term? It will not immediately be apparent from the term and ID that it
is
> a macrolanguage.
Well, I suppose we could use "Serbo-Croatian (macrolanguage)".
Peter Constable
|