From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Wed Jun 20 2007 - 04:09:46 CDT
Isn’t what the « territory » localization data in CLDR is already trying to
do?
Note however that ISO 3166 country names are sometimes formal long names
(they are currently agreed only in English and French but it is not as
simple as it would seem, for political reasons).
The CLDR has another focus: trying to focus (for now) a consensus about the
most common names.
The CLDR for now contains no additional entries for long formal names or
territories…
And also does not translate all ISO 3166 reserved codes that are
exceptionally assigned or reserved (with a name only in English), and
contains data about regions that are not encoded in ISO 3166 but in UN
statistics, plus historical data (that have been removed from ISO 3166-1 and
moved to ISO 3166-3 under a different code).
These differences are still not very critical. The main problem is to find
an agreement about country names in every language with enough source
references, and keeping the current objectives of ISO 3166 to publish only
the “politically correct” country names for use in International
organizations.
Finally, ISO 3166 currently publishes names using only capital letters. This
is effectively a localization problem because it does not respect the normal
orthography even in English and French only… So I just think that ISO 3166
should be used only as a reference for the assignment of codes to non
ambiguous modern countries, nothing more. The published ISO 3166 names are
not intented to be locally correct, and a localization of these published
names is still necessary, even in English and French, but the initial
objectives of ISO 3166-1 should be kept.
The best that ISO 3166 can do is to produce an authoritative mapping of
unambiguous countries and their codes, not the list of effective country
names that are part of a localization project that should remain an
informative (non mandatory) external reference. So why ISO isn’t seeking to
help improving the existing localization projects like the CLDR, looking for
possible issues or missing data that the CLDR could add in some future (for
example the long formal names)?
_____
De : unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] De la
part de JFC Morfin
Envoyé : mardi 19 juin 2007 14:28
À : Unicode Mailing List
Objet : what does "internationalized" mean?
I was recently invited in an ad-hoc ISO meeting over a proposed NWIP
concerning an internationalized version of the Country Codes (the most used
standard).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 20 2007 - 04:15:04 CDT