From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Fri May 21 2004 - 14:38:26 CDT
From: "Peter Constable" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> On Behalf
> > Of Philippe Verdy
> > I updated my own Excel sheet at:
> Philippe, I really appreciate the content you posted for it's potential
> value in guiding the RA in doing a better job with their data.
> I hope, however, that you do not plan to leave it online once Michael
> has his content corrected. In the long run, it really is unhelpful to
> have alternate sources for data. Inevitably, the mirrors get out of sync
> as the owners move on to other interests, and inevitably someone points
> to the copy, not the source.
data will be feeded and cached (in the server) from the Unicode normative text
show what I found.
Michael said that he will ignore all differences found in the previous HTML
files, considering only the text file as the source and adding the missing
Since then, there has been no clear justification for the removal of Georgian
Asomtavruli (I was told that the two scripts were being disunified in Unicode,
and it is already for bibliographic references, and considered distinct by most
Georgian readers that can't read it, but can read perfectly the default
Mkhedruli script variant with various combinations of diacritics for
transliteration, that could not work correctly if written with the Asomtavruli
So the 4-letter code has been published for some time, but only with a
conflicting 3-digits numeric code. As most users of ISO15924 will ignore the
numeric code in most applications, they may already have started to tag their
Asomtavruli references with "Geoa" (it was said that it was valid and
standard...) instead of Private Use codes (in Qaaa to Qabx). Will they need to
revert them? What if documents or books have already been printed in Georgia
using the "Geoa" code in their references? Or if this has already been used to
feed librarian indices for interchange?
May be there was no prior approval of this code and the publication was delayed
for later and should not have been published... Oh well...
--- Thanks to Michael for the addition of PropertyValueAlias="Common" for Code="Zyyy", and the correction of the incorrect HTML syntax of NCRs. I would have much prefered the absence of line wrap in this code (copy/paste operations by developers will insert an undesirable additional character that may be unnoticed in sources). On the opposite, there was no real need to prohibit line wraps in the Date column.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 21 2004 - 14:39:06 CDT