At 08:36 +0200 2006-04-21, Lang Gerard wrote:
>But my point is that, concerning this question,
>the first (and perhaps only) thing they have to
>do is to follow what is written in the ISO 639
>standard they voted and accepted, as it is
>mandatory in the ISO world.
The committee has the right to set working
procedures I am sure. I think that it would be
poor standardization for us to be "forced" to add
2-letter codes for Tok Pisin etc since it would
be BAD for those languages which can already be
represented with 3-letter codes to suddenly be
saddled with the ambiguity which would obtain
with two codes. That is why there is this
>N.B.:This exchange gives me the occasion of a question concerning ISO 15924
>"Code pour la representation des noms d'ecritures".
>Do you consider that the four-letter scripts codes given by ISO 15924 to
>represent "scripts", defined as "set of graphic characters used for the
>written form of one or more languages", are representing ordered set of
>graphic characters or do not consider any privilegied order concerning the
>graphic characters included in the considered set ?
I do not understand your question. Latn is the
Latin script, Nkoo is the N'Ko script, Cyrl is
the Cyrillic script... It has nothing to do with
ordering, but with script identity.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com