Peter Constable scripsit: > OK, you're saying we have an existing macrolanguage "Thuddian" with > macrolanguage mappings to existing languages "Northern Thuddian" and > "Southern Thuddian", and now we add a macrolanguage mapping from > "Thuddian" to an entry (new or existing) "Thwackian". Just so. > That's not a scenario I was imagining -- haven't considered it, in fact. > I was thinking of a case like Rawang: for now, there's only one entry, > though we know it's highly likely it will get split out in the future; > we just haven't had enough info on the varieties involved to create > split entries yet. So, we have Rawang today as an individual language, > and at some future point we have X, Y and Z, either deprecating Rawang > or, probably more likely, with Rawang now as a macrolanguage > encompassing X, Y and Z. > > Your "Thwackian" scenario might have some issues for 3066ter; the Rawang > scenario does not. Agreed. -- But you, Wormtongue, you have done what you could for your true master. Some reward you have earned at least. Yet Saruman is apt to overlook his bargains. I should advise you to go quickly and remind him, lest he forget your faithful service. --Gandalf John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.