Re: Letters for Indic transliteration

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Wed Jul 20 2005 - 17:40:09 CDT

Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Letters for Indic transliteration"

Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
In reply to: Mark Davis: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
Next in thread: Andreas Prilop: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 14:38 -0700 2005-07-20, Mark Davis wrote:
>¤
>First, ISO uses the term 'transliteration' to
>mean a reverseable transformation, and
>'transliteration' to mean a non-reversable one.

What?

I am sure this is not correct.

-- 
Michael Everson
Convener, ISO TC46/WG3
Conversion of Written Languages

Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Letters for Indic transliteration"
Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
In reply to: Mark Davis: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
Next in thread: Andreas Prilop: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 20 2005 - 17:43:32 CDT