Well, note that much documention includes it too. For example, see:
Full English name of the language from the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Standard 639. This is always restricted to characters
that can be mapped into the ASCII 127-character subset. This is not always
equivalent to the English version of LOCALE_SLANGUAGE. "
(Just saw this one earlier this morning, whole new meaning for ISO!).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" <email@example.com>
To: "Unicode List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: "Unicode List" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: Acronyms (off-topic)
> At 12:04 PM 08/02/2000 -0800, Geoffrey Waigh wrote:
> >On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Alain LaBonté wrote:
> > > À 07:12 2000-07-11 -0800, Doug Ewell a écrit:
> > > >Many English speakers also think ISO is an abbreviation or initialism
> > > >(not "acronym"; that term is correct only when the resulting "word"
> > > >is actually pronounced, like "AIDS" or "SIDA") of the English name
> > > >"International Standards (or Standardization) Organization." Of
> > > >this is wrong.
> > >
> > > [Alain] ISO is not pronounced as a word in English but it is in
> >Um, I and quite a few people I know pronounce ISO as if it were a word in
> So have I. Most of the spoken usages of it is as I-SO (EYE-SEW) not I-S-O
> > I have no idea on the origins of the name, but given that an
> >uncynical view of the function of that body is to produce international
> >standards, I doubt the correct etymology will win through.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT