Re: MF + BL code their codes

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: MF + BL code their codes

Mark Davis wrote:

> This has definitely fallen through the cracks. Can we please get this 
> done right away -- we'd like to have it in the Unicode CLDR 1.5.1 
> release now being finished.

These were submitted to IANA on Friday, November 2, and a newly revised 
Registry has just been released by IANA.

http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
NEW E-MAIL -->  dewell at roadrunner dot com
NEW URL -->  http://home.roadrunner.com/~dewell
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

Re: MF + BL code their codes

Doug Ewell wrote:

> http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry

Great, blogged:
http://omniplex.blogspot.com/2007/11/sorbian-and-frisian-use-latin-script.html

 Frank

Re: New scripts

Mark Davis wrote:

> We have new scripts on 
> http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/codechanges.html. Can you prepare the 
> forms for IANA?

I'll send them to ietf-languages, which is where this maintenance 
request actually belongs.  They'll have to sit there for a week before 
being sent to IANA.

BTW, I wonder how many people would have predicted, years ago when the 
basic rules for script subtags were formulated, that ISO 15924 would 
eventually add code elements for "Mathematical notation" and "Symbols." 
Section 3.4 says they must be added to the Registry, no cherry-picking 
allowed, and that seems fine in principle, but these two are at least as 
irrelevant to tagging of natural-language text as are the region subtags 
'AQ' and 'BV', or the language subtags 'mis' and 'und'.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://home.roadrunner.com/~dewell
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

New script subtags

ISO 15924 (scripts) has added nine new code elements, and added a second 
description for another ('Lana').  According to RFC 15924, all of these 
must be reflected in the Language Subtag Registry.

Below are the proposed new and modified records, posted here for a week 
before being sent to IANA.  Please review these and send any comments to 
the list.

Type: script
Subtag: Armi
Description: Imperial Aramaic
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Cakm
Description: Chakma
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Kthi
Description: Kaithi
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Lana
Description: Lanna
Description: Tai Tham
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Phli
Description: Inscriptional Pahlavi
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Phlv
Description: Psalter Pahlavi
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Prti
Description: Inscriptional Parthian
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Tavt
Description: Tai Viet
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Zmth
Description: Mathematical notation
Added: 200x-xx-xx
%%
Type: script
Subtag: Zsym
Description: Symbols
Added: 200x-xx-xx

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://home.roadrunner.com/~dewell
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

Re: New scripts

Doug Ewell wrote:

> add code elements for "Mathematical notation" and "Symbols." 
> Section 3.4 says they must be added to the Registry, no cherry-picking 
> allowed, and that seems fine in principle, but these two are at least as 
> irrelevant to tagging of natural-language text as are the region subtags 
> 'AQ' and 'BV', or the language subtags 'mis' and 'und'.

Indeed, Zmth and Zsym are rather odd.  If that's possible, what was the
problem with IPA and UPA ?  

 Frank

Re: New scripts

At 07:37 +0100 2007-11-27, Frank Ellermann wrote:

>Indeed, Zmth and Zsym are rather odd.

That is because they are not scripts.

>If that's possible, what was the problem with IPA and UPA ?

Those were orthographies of Latin.
--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

Re: New scripts

At 20:49 -0800 2007-11-26, Doug Ewell wrote:

>BTW, I wonder how many people would have predicted, years ago when 
>the basic rules for script subtags were formulated, that ISO 15924 
>would eventually add code elements for "Mathematical notation" and 
>"Symbols." Section 3.4 says they must be added to the Registry, no 
>cherry-picking allowed, and that seems fine in principle, but these 
>two are at least as irrelevant to tagging of natural-language text 
>as are the region subtags 'AQ' and 'BV', or the language subtags 
>'mis' and 'und'.

We had the option of NOT adding them to ISO 15924, but then 
permanently "reserving" their codes so that people could use them. 
This is what ISO 3166 does so that people can have "EU".

We didn't think that was better than putting them in the actual list. 
But note that we named them with an initial Z-, which shows that they 
are not really scripts.
--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

Re: New scripts

On 27 Nov 2007, at 04:49, Doug Ewell wrote:

> Mark Davis wrote:
>
>> We have new scripts on http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/codechanges.html 
>> . Can you prepare the forms for IANA?
>
> I'll send them to ietf-languages, which is where this maintenance  
> request actually belongs.  They'll have to sit there for a week  
> before being sent to IANA.
>
> BTW, I wonder how many people would have predicted, years ago when  
> the basic rules for script subtags were formulated, that ISO 15924  
> would eventually add code elements for "Mathematical notation" and  
> "Symbols." Section 3.4 says they must be added to the Registry, no  
> cherry-picking allowed, and that seems fine in principle, but these  
> two are at least as irrelevant to tagging of natural-language text  
> as are the region subtags 'AQ' and 'BV', or the language subtags  
> 'mis' and 'und'.

This is not a reply specifically to the above, but more a general  
comment/rant to all, prompted by the above:

I hate to say the obvious but if your own rules are causing you  
problems, simply change the rules! There's no point writing standards  
that don't meet the needs of the people who will be using them. The  
work done by people at the IETF and similar groups (W3C, anything  
ending in …WG) will affect billions of people, daily, for probably  
well over a hundred years. Anything you screw up now will have  
repercussions that the next generation will find painful to fix.

People were scared to fix problems in 1994 in case they 'broke the  
internet'. Now those problems are still with us but a thousand-fold  
harder to correct. Please don't make mistakes as recklessly as Marc  
Andressen did. Change your rules. Remove 'mis', 'und' and 'zxx' if you  
decide they have no place on the internet (the empty tag covers all, I  
think—e.g. when missing languages are added, extant usage of mis is  
not suddenly invalidated).

I will repeat one sentence for emphasis: There's no point writing  
standards that don't meet the needs of the people who will be using  
them. Or indeed creating standards that no-one will use. Do you really  
expect maths teachers to go off and add lang="zxx-Zmth" attributes  
around the class materials they saved as HTML from Microsoft Word?  
Then why is it even there? We live in the real world. Please don't  
forget that.

- Nicholas.

BTW. I'd never heard of Bouvet Island before. It's a prime example of  
how ridiculous all this is. It has it's own TLD?!! Someone needs their  
head examining.

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages <at> alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

Re: New scripts

Michael Everson wrote:

>> If that's possible, what was the problem with IPA and UPA ?

> Those were orthographies of Latin.

Turning characters right to left or upside down isn't what I
consider as an orthography.  Inspired by Latin and including
it as subset, was my impression when looking at the charts.

 Frank