From: Antoine Leca (Antoine10646@leca-marti.org)
Date: Mon May 16 2005 - 13:39:43 CDT
On Sunday, May 15, 2005 3:07 AM JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> But the combination of ISO 639, ISO 3166 and ISO 15924
I do not see clearly what is doing ISO 3166 here...
> Now, the problem is when one discusses the possibilty of a
> default script associated to a language: does the script exist?
I guess it does not.
For example, I do not see clearly the script to associate with the French
(Paris) Sign Language. While this one is outrageous, there are a pile of
others that are more subtle.
> I cannot associate a name to a language name without some
> kind of correspondancy rule I can check.
I fail to see exactly what you are trying to "associate".
I just guess strict bijection is impossible to achieve (I would add, as it
is always the case in social sciences.)
> I think reasonable to say that I can associate the name of a
> script to the name of a language if they share identical
> charsets when using (all) the encoding scheme(s) accepted
> by the programmers community?
I do not. Consider Gurbani and Gurmukhi resp. Hindi, Sanskrit and Punjabi.
Five names, yet there is only one encoding scheme...
Antoine
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 16 2005 - 13:41:46 CDT