Re: ISO 15924 and differences in French names of scripts

From: Samuel Thibault (samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org)
Date: Tue Oct 25 2005 - 09:28:13 CST

  • Next message: Andrew West: "Re: ISO 15924 and differences in French names of scripts"

    Hi,

    I'm not a specialist, but I can give some personal view.

    Michael Everson, le Tue 25 Oct 2005 15:55:46 +0100, a écrit :
    > ISO 15924 Blocks-4.0.0.txt

    > ancien italique alphabet italique
    they respectively mean "old italic" and "italic alphabet". The issue
    here is hence whether one needs to express "old".

    > bouhide bouhid
    bouhide seems more frenchish.

    > laotien lao
    laotien is probably more correct.

    > osmanais osmanya
    osmanais is most probably more correct.

    > runique runes
    runes is the correct word.

    > syllabaire autochtone canadien unifié syllabaires autochtones canadiens
    "unifié" means "unified". Is there a need to express "unified"? Else,
    the trailing 's'-es give a plural form. Is there a plural form in the
    original english name?

    As for accents differences, I'd say the version without accents is
    probably wrong :)

    Hope this helps,
    Regards,
    Samuel

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 25 2005 - 09:29:03 CST