From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Sun May 02 2004 - 16:57:15 CDT
From: "John Hudson" <tiro@tiro.com>
> Michael Everson wrote:
> In the code lists at http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-codes.html the
4-letter
> script codes are shown capitalised, e.g. Arab not arab, Armn not armn, etc..
Is this
> intentional? Should the codes always be capitalised? Does it matter if they
are not?
According to the ISO 15924 standard itself (4 Script codes, 4.1 Stucture of the
alphabetic codes):
[quote]
The four-letter codes shall be written with an initial capital Latin letter and
final small Latin letters (taken from the range Aaaa to Zzzz). This serves to
help differentiate script codes from language codes and country codes: so, for
example, Mong mon MON or Mong mn MN would refer to a book in the Mongolian
script, in the Mongolian language, originating in Mongolia.
[/quote]
So the title capitalisation is normative for the 4-letters script codes, exactly
like the uppercase capitalisation of country codes (ISO 3166) and lowercase of
language subtag codes (ISO 639).
But a consequence is that other cased forms will not be used in ISO 15924, so if
they occur, they will (like for ISO 3166 and ISO 639) not be case-significant in
most applications, given the predefined fixed range of possible values (Aaaa to
Zzzz).
So the presentation is intentional... Read the text of the standard itself...
"Arab" and "Latn" are correct, not "arab" and "latn", or "ARAB" and "LATN"
(which are tolerable only in contexts where confusion with other codes is
impossible)...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT