On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 10:11:23AM +0900, Martin J. Duerst wrote:
> At 00/04/24 16:25 +0100, Michael Everson wrote:
> >Ar 11:01 -0400 2000-04-24, scr$ByP(Bbh Rebecca S. Guenther:
> > >I've put up the change notice for ISO 639. See:
> > >
> > >http://lcweb.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html
> > >
> > >Thanks to Michael Everson for letting me use his coding.
> > >
> > >Rebecca
> Hello Michael,
> This is great progress. I hope we can soon see the full
> official list of language codes on the web.
> Some suggestions/questions:
> - Please make sure that this page is served indicating
> iso-8895-1 as its encoding, according to
Or just RFC 2070.
> - Please use <th>...</th> instead of <td><b></b></td>
> for the header cells in the table.
Why? I think it is better to use the HTML already done as more
browsers would understand it and it has the desired effect.
> - Please use <span class='changed'> or some such instead
> of just <I> for the changed pieces. Use a stylesheet
> to make it display the way you want.
This is also prune to not being honoured by a number of browsers.
Better be conservative here, so as many people as possible can
read our specifications.
> - New definitions of 2-letter codes make it more difficult
> to define what code should be used in ietf-based protocols.
> Originally, the idea for the update to RFC 1766 was to use
> the two-letter code where this already existed, but the
> three-letter code for the other languages. This will need
> some more thought, and probably a cutoff date or a precedence
> rule. The table would provide enough information for that.
I think we should be careful with such rules, viz. the recent
discussion on Lithuanian characters in 10646.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT