You misunderstand. There are 3 items called "Hebrew" The script is distinct from the others, and is not at issue. Everything we have been saying is that the items must be distinct *within a type*. See the line: ><t>For a records of a given 'Type', the value of the 'Description' The problem is that there are two cases with type=language & description=Hebrew: he and iw. For that reasons, we need to restrict the clause to only worry about non-deprecated languages. Fleshing it out with examples, reordering slightly, and adding the qualification, here is my suggested language: <t>For each collection of records of a particular 'Type' (excluding records with a Deprecated field), each of the values that appears in a 'Description' field MUST be unique. The description values MUST also be unique even after removing parentheticals and inverting any string containing commas. Outside of parentheticals, commas MUST only be used for inverted strings.</t> <t>An inverted name such as "Xishu, Gibrus" is used to facilitate sorting in English according to most salient feature (in this case, "Xishu"). Such inversions would not necessarily be reflected in translations to other languages. Commas (outside of parentheticals) always indicates inversion, not multiple names or other constructs. Thus "Xishu, Gibrus" is always equivalent to "Gibrus Xishu", just differing in presentation.</t> <t>For example, suppose that the following description is in a language subtag record:</t> <pre>Description: Gibrus Xishu</pre> <t>Then that line cannot occur again in that record, nor in any other language subtag record. Moreover, none of the following can occur in any language subtag record:</t> <pre>Description: Gibrus Xishu (any comment)</pre> <pre>Description: Xishu, Gibrus </pre> <pre>Description: Xishu, Gibrus (any comment)</pre> </t>For records taken from a source standard (such as ISO 639 or ISO 3166), the 'Description' value(s) SHOULD be based on the source standard. The source standard's descriptions MAY also be edited prior to insertion. Multiple descriptions in the source standard MUST be split into separate 'Description' fields. Duplicate, redundant, conflicting, or otherwise problematic descriptions MUST either be corrected or omitted. Parenthetical comments, inverted names, and other formatting variants SHOULD be regularized according to the guidelines used to update the registry in <xref target="registry-update"></xref>.</t> Mark On 10/17/06, John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> wrote:
Mark Davis scripsit: > Good point: we need to exclude the deprecated cases (I did that in my > program, but neglected to note it). It's not uncommon for a script and a language to have the same name, and I don't think we should insist on an artificial distinction here. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org "After all, would you consider a man without honor wealthy, even if his Dinar laid end to end would reach from here to the Temple of Toplat?" "No, I wouldn't", the beggar replied. "Why is that?" the Master asked. "A Dinar doesn't go very far these days, Master. --Kehlog Albran Besides, the Temple of Toplat is across the street." The Profit
_______________________________________________ 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.