From: Antoine Leca (Antoine10646@Leca-Marti.org)
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 04:36:45 CDT
[ This is not copied to unicore, since I am allowed there. This is copyied
to ietf-language because the question was, but it may perfectly be filtered
On Sunday, May 02, 2004 10:57 PM, John Hudson va escriure:
> 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?
I remember having a discussion about 4 years ago this about, regarding an
item of conflict between ISO 15924 (then pretty advanced) and a new code
list used for a similar use in Microsoft's and Adobe's proprietary
"OpenType". I am not 100% sure, but I even record you might be instrumental
in the design of this second list.
If I remember correctly, a good part of these lists were merged, which is
certainly a good thing, since we do not have any need for two concurrent
lists. In fact, I believed the intent on both parts was to merge. On its
part, ISO 15924 did change the codes it had for everything that were in use,
even including the Indian OpenType support which was still in infancy but
was shiping as part of IE5.
But then there was the point about capitalization. Following previous use in
Apple resources then TrueType, Microsoft designed its codes in all lower
case (which with Apple was reserved for the non-private specifications).
OTOH, Michael designed ISO 15924 to fit well with both ISO 639 and ISO 3166,
and choose title case. The discrepancy was seen then, but it was accorded to
do nothing, and that ISO 15924 will continue to use title case while
OpenType will use the same codes but transformed to lower case. And we all
agreed that any discrepancy about capitalization should not be meaningful.
Why is this issue coming back now?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT