|
Many thanks to all of you for
discussion of this topic.
It gave some planned results, like
better understanding of syntax of the initials in English.
It also gave some unexpected but very
valuable and interesting results, like the way the initials are read in Herbrew,
or that people in Denmark avoid writing initials at all.
Special thanks to Stefan Probst, who
asked:
what the long threats about
R(o|u)mania, Canada, California, Yankees, and Initials in various countries...... .... have to do with Unicode? Sceptical opinions induce to better
formulation :).
All these cases deal with
transliteration. And transliteration as far as I could understand is one of the
fields covered by Unicode. At least I saw here many times discussions on such
issues like transliteration algorithm, difference between trancription and
transliteration etc.
The task of transliteration is to
substitute the letters of one script by another. But the practical goal of
script conversion is to help people who do not know such a script to find
desired structures and patterns in foreign text in order to operate with them.
References and Bibliography is a good example of this.
If due to some cultural or
orthographical reasons they get strange or unrecognizable syntax of the target
pattern, the practical goal of transliteration wouldn't be achieved. Now, after
this discussion is over, I can clearly see that initials can be one of such
difficulties. But the question: to complicate or not to complicate the
transliteration algorithm with syntax rules can be another topic of
discussion.
Thank you once more,
Vladimir
Ivanov
|
Title: הודעה
- Initials Vladimir Ivanov
- RE: Initials Jonathan Rosenne
- Re: Initials Wm Se?n Glen
- Re: Initials Christopher JS Vance
- Re: Initials Keld J�rn Simonsen
- RE: Initials Jonathan Rosenne
- RE: Initials Vladimir Ivanov
- RE: Initials $B$m!;!;!;!;(B $B$m!;!;!;(B
- RE: Initials Marco Cimarosti
- RE: Initials Jonathan Rosenne

