On 02/20/2001 12:33:04 PM John Hudson wrote:
>The only thing that I insist on is that we maintain the distinction
between
>Roman and roman.
Which is?
>I wonder though, Peter, about your suggestion that '"Latin script" is less
>acceptable since "Latin" suggests something constrained to the language
>Latin'. Couldn't the same thing be said about 'Arabic script'?
Probably. I was just trying to nit-pick back at the nit-pickers. :-)
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:19 EDT