[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ltru] 639-5 (was RE: ISO 639 language code addition rules...)



Leif Halvard Silli scripsit:

> >The same is true of "en" and "de".
> 
> You mean that you cannot use "en" to spellcheck "de" unless you 
> assume that "en" means "de".

Of course not.  I mean that "en" is insufficiently specific to
spell-check: you need at least "en-us", "en-ca", "en-gb", "en-au",
and possibly others.

Likewise, "de-ch" has different spelling from other kinds of "de".

> However, with 'no' there is a very likely risk that someone thinks 
> that 'no' is spesific enough. And that, or similar risks, exist 
> for all macrolanguages.

And for all pluricentric languages whether macro- or not.

-- 
John Cowan   <cowan at ccil.org>   http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
One time I called in to the central system and started working on a big
thick 'sed' and 'awk' heavy duty data bashing script.  One of the geologists
came by, looked over my shoulder and said 'Oh, that happens to me too.
Try hanging up and phoning in again.'  --Beverly Erlebacher
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at ietf.org
https://www.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.