From: Addison Phillips [wM] (email@example.com)
Date: Thu May 20 2004 - 14:58:08 CDT
I don't care about the order, so long as it is stable over time. Personally I find the latter form more logical (with the identifier, i.e. the code, first). I view the English and French names and the "PVA" as merely descriptive or informative information. The code and the ID number should go first, IMO.
But if the file is in some other format, that's fine, so long as the format is stable.
Addison P. Phillips
Director, Globalization Architecture
webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility
Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group
Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force
Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Michael Everson
> Sent: 2004年5月20日 10:59
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: ISO 15924 draft fixes
> At 10:00 -0700 2004-05-20, Addison Phillips [wM] wrote:
> >I concur with Peter. If there are multiple
> >documents now, then I'd like to see a single
> >normative document...
> It will be the plain-text version, and for the
> purposes of fixing the current regrettable mess
> I'm taking it as read that the plain text version
> was always the normative version.
> >and furthermore I would like it to *be*
> >normative (and I'd like to know which one it
> >is). The text file is listed on the web site as
> >the "alternative"...
> It should say normative.
> Is the format order satisfactory?
> Or would it be preferable to have it in the
> format of Table 1
> Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 20 2004 - 14:59:46 CDT