Re: Language Codes

From: E . A . Zen (ericzen@ez-net.com)
Date: Wed Oct 23 2002 - 23:14:42 EDT

  • Next message: Andrew Dunbar: "Re: Language Codes"

    On 2002.10.21 13:04 David Chart wrote:
    >
    > The problem with historical languages is that you need to specify a time
    > as well. For example, en-GB-1600 is rather different from en-GB-2002
    > (have a look at Shakespeare). A dictionary based on a renaissance
    > mathematician is one historical slice of Latin, and different from
    > la-GB-1400, as well as from la-IT-1100.
    >
    > Until ISO get this sorted out, which I suppose might happen, I suggest
    > that we avoid using kludges to handle dead languages and historical
    > versions of living languages.
    >
    > (Although the ability to set my locale to en-GB-1600 would be rather
    > cool -- 'Thou hast changed thy document. Dost thou wish to retain thy
    > changes on disk?')
    >
    > --
    > David Chart
    > http://www.dchart.demon.co.uk/

    The mass complexity of languages, be as organic as they are, still results in
    many problems. Language, Locale, Dialect, Subvariant and Age are all
    necessary. If SIL International has a set of public standards for breakdown
    (other than the anthropology section), it would probably be more beneficial to
    move to SIL, despite risk of non-compliance to ISO.

    Either that, or we send Andrew to some of these barely-existent meetings and
    see if we get anything out of it.

    -Zen



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Oct 23 2002 - 23:22:40 EDT