RE: [Ltru] Re: Updated draft-4646bis...

Arabic as used in Colombia written in Cyrillic is not an absurdity. It's perfectly reasonable; it just doesn't happen to be real.

But you do already have an absurdity: IPA transcription in Korean script: by definition, IPA must be in Latin script. (That's different from phonetic transcription in Korean script, which does exist, BTW.)

In your Klingon and Basque examples, the particular languages, script or regions used do not contribute to the absurdity, though some might wrongly perceive that to be the case. It is only the combination of fonupa with Cyrl that is absurd.

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Addison Phillips [mailto:addison@yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 7:39 AM
> To: Doug Ewell
> Cc: LTRU Working Group
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Updated draft-4646bis...
>
> Doug mentioned:
>  > The passage is supposed to be
>  > about semantically consistent tags that refer to non-existent
> language
>  > variations.
>
> I'm not sure that it is. The section is about "valid-yet-useless" tags,
> which includes, I assume, absurdities. I didn't want to create an
> absurdity by ignoring Prefix. Thus the "problem" (if you can call it
> that) is a dearth of generic variants.
>
> We could use "tlh-Cyrl-AQ-fonupa", I suppose, or maybe
> "eu-Cyrl-SN-fonupa" (Basque, Cyrillic, Senegal, UPA transcription).
>
> Addison
>
> --
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
> Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG
>
> Internationalization is an architecture.
> It is not a feature.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

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