From rosenne@NetVision.net.il Mon Nov 24 20:16:15 1997 Received: from alpha.netvision.net.il (root@alpha.NetVision.net.il [194.90.1.13]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA09635; Mon, 24 Nov 1997 20:16:12 +0100 Received: from rosenne (ts026p4.pop9a.netvision.net.il [194.90.5.222]) by alpha.netvision.net.il (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id VAA12392; Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:23:14 +0200 (IST) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971124211404.006af574@mail.netvision.net.il> X-Sender: rosenne@mail.netvision.net.il X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:14:04 +0200 To: keld@dkuug.dk (Keld J|rn Simonsen) From: Jonathan Rosenne Subject: Re: Transliteration [and transcription] Cc: i18n@dkuug.dk In-Reply-To: <199711241405.PAA05952@dkuug.dk> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 15:05 24/11/97 +0100, Keld J|rn Simonsen wrote: >Jonathan Rosenne writes: > >> I don't think that this day and age there is much need for "representing >> characters from one script by the characters of another script", not after >> we have ISO 10646. Even if there are such local needs, I cannot see why >> they should be standardized. > >Well, these are cultural conventions, as far as I can see. >For example, there are a specific way of transliterating russian >cyrillic into danish, and also on how to transliterate serbian into >danish, and those rules should be clearly recorded, so that >for example searches on the net, for "Jeltsin" could be matched >for Danish users. > >Note that there may be other rules for other languages to >transliterate for example russian, the germans transliterate >the mentioned name as "Jeltzin" and the english transliteration is >"Yeltsin" This is "representing sounds from one script by the characters of another script", not "representing characters...". We were requested to distinguish between transliteration (characters) and transcription (sounds). I still see no need to standardize the first. Jonathan