In message <199801071908.UAA09749@dkuug.dk> Alain LaBont writes:
> A 11:11 07/01/98 +0100, Michael Everson a crit :
> >As regards ISO 15924, we _could_ add numeric codes to the draft standard,
> >though I see no compelling reason to do so (i.e., user requirement). The
> >user requirement for using mnemonic letters, however, is rather large.
> [Alain] :
> Then if you are logical with your argument (and I know that in you're
> defense of minority group, you will consider this easily), there is a
> requirement, if it is so, that there be mnemonicity in all user languages.
> Think about it. Otherwise it creates problems. In Canada we see these
> problems every day.
> Numerical codes can (and should) at any stage be translated into the user's
> language and still keep their efficiency. But letter codes are less
> efficient by nature and machines just require pure bits, the simplest way
> to represent pure numbers, concepts making total abstraction of any user
> language representation.
Don't forget that ISO NP 15924 is NOT an IT standard, so not all
users of this standard will have the opportunity to do such
conversions by computers, even though such codes may well nbe useful
in IT systems. Meaningful alphabetic codes are therefore likely to be
-- John Clews (Chair of ISO/TC46/SC2: Conversion of Written Languages)
SESAME Computer Projects, 8 Avenue Road, Harrogate, HG2 7PG, England Email: Scripts@sesame.demon.co.uk; tel: +44 (0) 1423 888 432
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:38 EDT