[Pkg-isocodes-devel] r1124 - in trunk/iso-codes: . iso_3166/iso_3166_2

[LI Daobing]

On Nov 3, 2007 8:05 PM, Alexis Darrasse <alexis at ortsa.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 03:08:17PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Quoting lidaobing-guest at alioth.debian.org (lidaobing-guest at alioth.debian.org):
> > I do not agree with such changes.
> >
> > I think that such "distinction" is a derivation from the standard and
> > our list should be standard, all the standard but only the standard.
> >
> > I know there are such distinctions in the file but I indeed removed
> > them as long as I was finding them.
>
> I have the same opinion as Christian on that matter, and furthermore it
> seems to me that there is no ambiguity in iso_3166_2.xml, considering
> the entries and their context.  Are there any languages for which this
> explicit disambiguation is necessary to properly translate the entries?

yes, for example, `Nord'

when used as FR-59, it should be translated to 诺尔(U+8BFA,U+5C14)[1]
when used as HT-ND or RW-03, it should be translated to 北部(U+5317,
U+90E8) or 北方(U+5317, U+65B9)[2][3]

other translation is not acceptable.

[1] http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E8%AF%BA%E5%B0%94%E7%9C%81&variant=zh-cn
[2] http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E6%B5%B7%E5%9C%B0&variant=zh-cn#.E8.A1.8C.E6.94.BF.E5.8C.BA.E5.9F.9F
[3] http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E5%8D%A2%E6%97%BA%E8%BE%BE%E8%A1%8C%E6%94%BF%E5%8C%BA%E5%88%92&variant=zh-cn



>
> I believe that it would be usefull to complete the list of conventions
> present in the beginning of the file and perhaps mention their existance
> in the README. I would be glad to do that, if there is a concensus on
> what these conventions should be.
>
> Following the ISO to the letter would not necessarily be the best
> choice, as there are cases (e.g. accents in Vietnam entries) where our
> divergence is a real enhancement.  And there are of course all the
> countries for which the ISO is not available, it is impossible to guess
> the choices of the ISO as it does not follow a single set of
> conventions.
>



-- 
Best Regards,
 LI Daobing