Manuel Strehl wrote:
> It's clear to me, that I could map "Hana" and "Kata" to "US" just for
> the sake of having a Japanese Minority in the states.
This might not work too well, since the ISO 15924 code elements you're
thinking of are "Hira" and "Kana".
> Of course, the mapping must be sensible in a way, that is, explain,
> how the mapping is done. I'd be fine, I guess, with having all
> official languages and important historic ones respected (disputable
> cases, where larger minority languages are suppressed, may exist of
> course).
You've sort of defined your own problem: how to decide when minority
usage of a script within a country is "significant" or "important" or
"sensible." Remember, too, that "official languages" may not be what you
expect; English, for example, is not defined as an official language in
the US, UK, Australia, or New Zealand.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell Received on Mon Aug 20 2012 - 08:27:39 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Aug 20 2012 - 08:27:42 CDT