RE: [Ltru] "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)"

I don’t think at present anything identifies the entry for sw as being a macrolanguage entry. That’s the gap.

Peter

From: Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org]
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 9:38 AM
To: John Cowan
Cc: Doug Ewell; LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] "X" vs. 'X (macrolanguage)"

I'd favor:

Description: Swahili

A vanishingly small number of people will know what "macrolanguage" means or how it should be translated, so having it be part of the name would be clumsy. I also thought we were going to have macrolanguage as a field -- that would be clean way to do it, and if so, then including " (macrolanguage)" would also be redundant.

Mark
On Dec 7, 2007 10:48 PM, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org<mailto:cowan@ccil.org>> wrote:
Doug Ewell scripsit:

> Description: Swahili (macrolanguage)
> Description: Swahili
>
> But because of the no-inversion rule, it turns out we will be getting
> rid of some of the 639-1/-2 names anyway (see "Sotho, Southern" above).
> Is it still necessary to list both "X" and "X (macrolanguage)" as in the
> Swahili example above?
I'd say remove the second line in favor of the first, which is definitive.

--
John Cowan
       cowan@ccil.org<mailto:cowan@ccil.org>
               I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org<mailto:Ltru@ietf.org>
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

--
Mark