From: Michael Everson (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 16:08:03 CDT
A person who wishes to remain anonymous wrote:
>Aw, c'mon Michael. The differences in regional inflections of the
>duck language should be handled with higher level protocols, such as
>markup. Since virtually all ducks live in a pre-literate society and
>since virtually all (human legible) documents transcribed from duck
>use scripts already encoded into the UCS, I don't see the need to
>encode fanciful custom orthographies put forward by certain swans,
>geese, and other malcontents. Certainly the need for combining
>levels of wetness (in some of the proposed encodings) is
>disconcerting and possibly impractical.
>I would not be surprised, however, to shortly see a registration
>request from certain waterfowl associations for their own language
>tag. Given the need for a 5 letter subtag, perhaps the English
>transcription of the language name is appropriate. Hmm...
><x xml:lang="quack-GB-x-cornwall">quack, quack, honk, etc...</x>
Thank you all for enjoying discussion of something besides Phoenician.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 10 2004 - 16:13:52 CDT