Re: Unicode transliterations (and other operations)

[Peter_Constable]

On 07/04/2001 06:01:55 AM James Kass wrote:

>The web page cited by Mr. Constable is simply misleading, unless
>it were to be amended to clearly state "for the purposes of
>this and related documents..." these words mean &c.

Please note: I wasn't citing that page because I consider those definitions
ideal ones that should guide our discussions. They are the normative
definitions used in certain ISO standards, though, and so are important for
people to be aware of in relation to ISO standards.


>No international body has any authority to alter the meaning of
>existing words in my language or any of our languages.

True, though of course they do have the authority to say, "In the context
of our standards we use term x to mean X."


- Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>