From: Jon Hanna (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Oct 03 2006 - 03:37:37 CST
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> I just realized that despite containing just a fairly small piece of
> normative information (numeric codes for not known, male, female, and
> not applicable when expressing human sex), the standard is interesting
> from the localization point of view.
> Human sex is surely a data element that may need to be expressed in a
> localized manner. The informative annex of ISO/IEC 5218:2004 contains a
> considerable amount of data for that, but of course it does not cover
> all locales. Wouldn't it be rather natural to include sex into the CLDR
> data format, initially populating it with data from the annex?
I'd say the matters discussed earlier about other sex and gender labels
beyond the four given in ISO/IEC 5218:2004 are best deemed out of scope
for the CLDR though - I neither think its a matter that should be
decided upon at that point, nor one that is uncontroversial enough
amongst those who could be deemed experts in the matter to allow for a
clear enough set of definitions. Let the next version of ISO/IEC 5218
cover it perhaps, but for CLDR just encode local definitions for what we
There's another question about recording this, do we just use
adjectives, just nouns or adjectives, nouns and perhaps other terms
(man, woman, boy, girl as some English examples)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 03 2006 - 03:57:13 CST