locale for Uzbekistan

[Christian Rose]

tor 2003-09-25 klockan 20.47 skrev Pablo Saratxaga:
> I think if a standard exists to name scripts it is better to follow it.

FWIW, that's exactly my opinion too.

There is a standard for script identifiers and it probably exists for a
good reason. I'm not convinced that writing out the full English names
of scripts is a good choice in the long run. Are all English names of
scripts unambigous? Are they all unique? Is there always a one to one
mapping? Given that there are several languages that have several
different spellings, I'm bound to believe this is also the case for some
script names.

So using the ISO standard for script identifiers seems only logical,
since the standard guarantees all identifiers to be unique. Using the
full English names might have been a good move in the past before this
standard existed, but I can't really see the benefit of still doing so
now.


Christian