I don't see the problem here all have ISO codes who cares about
capitalisation or not, ISO codes are not capitalised for as far as I know
and most will certainly never change and will always stay that way.
Correct and official ISO codes:
nds-nl; Nedersaksisch (personal reply from ISO code commission)
rmy; Romani Vlax (official code; ethnologue)
pdc; Pensylvanian German (official code; ethonologue)
lij; Liguarian (official code; ethnologue. current proposal "roa-lij" or
"lij")
Semi-official codes:
vls; West-Vlaams (the term Flemish is used as collective term for Dutch
dialects in Flandres, but is mostly associated with West-Flemish, so I've
heard. "gem-wvl" could be an option aswell)
ksh; Ripuarian (ksh; Keulsh, Ripuarian not listed on ethnologue)
Not listed on ethnologue, "dialect code" is used (gem-, bat-, map- etc):
bat-smg; Samogitian (not listed on ethnologue)
qbn or map-bms; Banyumassan (not listed on ethnologue)
Servien
2005/12/21, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>om>:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
Actually you misunderstand me. When you mix standards and the
difference between those standards disappears because of restraints
that YOU are under, it means that what you do is not up to standard.
Consequently it cannot be said that we implement the ISO-639 codes.
When we adopt the ISO-639-3 codes we have the SIL information
included. It is a custom to keep the two character ISO-639-1 codes as
well. This is in my opinion the only way out of this mess. NB We have
been using these codes already for over a year in Wiktionary.
Yes I know. URL's are case insensitive. We can implement ISO-639-3
and we should do this. NB there are even standard formats to indicate
that a certain script is used as there are ISO codes for those too
(ISO 15924).
So we either adopt a standard and do it right or we should not say
that we adopt a standard. If you want an official statement as to the
stability of the ISO-639-3, I think that I can get you that.
One also needs to remember that ISO 639-3 still reserves a block of
codes beginning with the letter "q" tha are user defined. These can
be used for languages that are not included in the standard. The
languages where that would be needed are not going to be the most
popular or best known, and are unlikely to become big wikia. If at
some future time thay are given a standard code conversion should not
be a huge operation.
Ec
Hoi,
Many of the current Wiktionaries make use of the ISO-639-3 codes. Here
there is no relevance as to the size of a prospective Wiki. We use the
code to indicate that a word is in a given language. I have extended the
data design of Ultimate Wiktionary to include room for a translation
framework. The idea is that is will help us manage the translation the
Mediawiki messages. Given that UW will be a Mediawiki application and
that we want the localisation for the languages that make use of it
(basically all of them) we need a way to manage the translations in a
structured way..
Please have a look at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design#Managing_tra…
and give me your questions, your comments.
Thanks,
GerardM
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l