RE: Letters for Indic transliteration

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Wed Jul 20 2005 - 18:31:03 CDT

  • Next message: Mark Davis: "Re: Letters for Indic transliteration"

    At 16:07 -0700 2005-07-20, Peter Constable wrote:
    >Mark Davis wrote:
    > > First, ISO uses the term 'transliteration' to mean a reverseable
    >transformation, and 'transliteration' to mean a non-reversable one.
    >Correction: they use "transcription" to mean a non-reversable one.

    Is this true in the TC37 terminology definitions? It is found in some
    of the TC46 standards, though perhaps not in all of them. (The
    question is, does "ISO" use these terms this way, or just some of its

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 20 2005 - 18:32:54 CDT