W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 1997

Re: Transliteration [and transcription]: replies to J Rosenne

From: Andrea Vine <avine@actracorp.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 09:49:39 -0800
Message-ID: <34747833.5E040286@actracorp.com>
To: (wrong string) ürst" <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
CC: i18n@dkuug.dk, xojig@xopen.co.uk, www-international@w3.org, wgi18n@terena.nl
Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> I think there is quite some need for transcription, at least I conclude
> that from the contributions to this thread.
> I am not really sure whether there is that much of a need for
> transliteration, as defined. It doesn't help the average web user,
> or computer user otherwise, very much. Transcription is much more
> appropriate there. Transliteration is mostly used by script specialists,
> for example in analyzing old texts. But these specialists rarely
> all use the same system, they create their own systems as they
> see fit for the research they are doing.

I would just like to chime in and say I am not a script specialist, but I do need
transliteration in the case of Japanese.  Even if I get enough practice to retain the
kana, I don't expect I'll ever have the opportunity to learn enough kanji to be
literate.  Therefore, entire transliterated Japanese texts are quite useful.  I
suspect there are others who have this need, especially when it comes to
pictographic/ideographic/logographic scripts.

The end of Pavlov's experiments came when one sunny afternoon, the doorbell
rang and the dog ate the Avon lady.
Received on Thursday, 20 November 1997 13:49:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:40:41 UTC