Re: [Ltru] Minor proofreading nits again (a UNGEGN transliteration)

[Mark Davis ☕ <[e-mail]>]

> This may require the identification of the source script or source
language, in addition to the main subtags in the language tag.

>It may also require the identification of the specific conventions used by
transformation, such as the rules used by a UNGEGN transliteration.

This means: specifying a UNGEGN transliteration for the specific convention,
rather than many of the possible alternatives (BGN, LOC, ISO, Korean
Ministry of Information, etc.)

However, I looked over the text, and there is a more complete description
and examples in the following paragraphs. So I think the text flows better
to just remove these two sentences. I reworked that text a bit to make it
clearer and add examples. Since I don't think I can post yet, here are my
working texts.

http://unicode.org/repos/cldr/trunk/docs/rfc/draft-davis-t-langtag-ext.html
http://unicode.org/repos/cldr/trunk/docs/rfc/draft-davis-t-langtag-ext.txt

Mark*

— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*


On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 18:45, "Martin J. Dürst" <[e-mail]>wrote;wrote:

> While we are looking at this phrase ("a UNGEGN transliteration"), I want to
> point out that it was confusing for me because it suggests that there are
> more than one UNGEGN transliteration for a given ordered language pair. If
> that's the case, how is the actually used transliteration identified? If
> it's not the case, then I suggest changing to "the corresponding UNGEGN
> transliteration" (or something similar).
>