- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:24:27 -0400
- To: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>
- Cc: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>, www-international@w3.org
Mark Davis scripsit: > I believe that that is adding an interpretation to "und" which is not > borne out by either the source standards, nor in common usage. ISO 639-2 says merely "Undetermined", but this is placed in a column labeled "English name of language", so I think it's fair to read it as "Undetermined language". But ISO 639-3 is, I think, definitive. http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/scope.asp#S says (in part): The identifier [und] (undetermined) is provided for those situations in which a language or languages must be indicated but the *language* cannot be identified [emphasis added]. By contrast, "zxx" is explained in the next sentence thus: The identifier [zxx] (no linguistic content) may be applied in a situation in which a language identifier is required by system definition, but the item being described does not actually contain linguistic content. In any case, the document I'm commenting on says that "zxx" is non-linguistic content, and that "und" and "" are synonymous and represent linguistic content. Whatever "und" may or may not mean, I think there's no doubt that "" can be applied to both linguistic and non-linguistic content. -- You escaped them by the will-death John Cowan and the Way of the Black Wheel. cowan@ccil.org I could not. --Great-Souled Sam http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2007 20:24:45 UTC