• From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:53:54 +1000

 From: "Miloslav Nic" <nicmila@i...>
 

> I was just wandering:
> 
> Does anybody know why there are  two different sets of three letter
> language codes: one for terminology and other for bibliography
> applications  ?
> 
> My current explanation is not publishable :) 
 
From memory, the bibliographic one standardizes the MARC codes
(and therefore uses contractions of English names) and the other
standardizes contractions based on the romanized native name
for countries.  I believe they tried hard to find some compromise,
but the use cases were different.

So an English speaker would find it easier to figure out the name
from the MARC codes, and a native speaker would find it easier
to track down their own language's code using the romanized
name, in theory. 

I think the trend in i18n circles for the WWW is to favour 
contractions based on native names.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • Why different languages codes 639-2/T and 639-2/B
    • From: Miloslav Nic <nicmila@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Next by Date: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb
• Previous by thread: Why different languages codes 639-2/T and 639-2/B
• Next by thread: Generating XML mixed elements using DOM
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread