Re: Cheyenne and international standards
THIBAUD SALLE (c2040@er.uqam.ca)
Fri, 27 May 1994 14:41:06 EDT
>
> Original Sender: smo.ac.uk!caoimhin (Caoimhin P. ODonnaile)
> Mailing List: NAT-LANG (nat-lang@gnosys.svle.ma.us)
>
>
> > In regard to Everson's query, whether Cheyenne is or should be written with
> > ring-above or dot-above, perhaps the solution is to take one or the other
> > arbitrarily, say ring above, and recognize that changing the glyph or the
> > typographical realization of it is easily achieved. The abstract entity is
> > voiceless vowel. The symbol is less important, and easily changed.
>
> A similar situation exists in Polish. People often write grave accents
> instead of acute accents, this being regarded as "the same thing". Usually,
> however, acute accents are used in printed books, so this is the natural
> choice for use in character codes. Some consistent choice has to be
> made when encoding the language, otherwise spelling checkers, etc won't
> work (or will be much more difficult to implement).
>
> Kevin Donnelly
>
You find that type of error in French too, mainly because of
pronunciation evolution and sheer ignorance...