Eg, in http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/cefact/locode/gr.htm
Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033> * * *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* ** On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Mark Davis ☕ <m...@macchiato.com> wrote: > I tend to agree. What would be useful is to have one column for the city > in the local language (or more columns for multilingual cities), but it is > extremely useful to have an ASCII version as well. > > Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033> > * > * > *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* > ** > > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Jonathan Rosenne < > jonathan.rose...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't agree with the criticism. These place name are there to be >> readable by a wide audience, rather than writable by locals and >> specialists. They require the lowest common denominator.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Jony**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] *On >> Behalf Of *john knightley >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 02, 2012 6:35 PM >> *To:* Doug Ewell >> *Cc:* unicode@unicode.org; loc...@unece.org >> *Subject:* Re: Character set cluelessness**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Sad to say this seems to be close to the norm for all to many large >> organizations where if it isn't in the 1990's version of the Times Roman >> font then it's out. **** >> >> John**** >> >> On 3 Oct 2012 00:26, "Doug Ewell" <d...@ewellic.org> wrote:**** >> >> The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) has released a >> new version of UN/LOCODE, and their Secretariat Note document is just as >> clueless as ever about character set usage in international standards: >> >> "Place names in UN/LOCODE are given in their national language versions >> as expressed in the Roman alphabet using the 26 characters of the >> character set adopted for international trade data interchange, with >> diacritic signs, when practicable (cf. Paragraph 3.2.2 [sic; should be >> 3.3.2] of the UN/LOCODE Manual). International ISO Standard character >> sets are laid down in ISO 8859-1 (1987) and ISO10646-1 (1993). (The >> standard United States character set (437), which conforms to these ISO >> standards, is also widely used in trade data interchange)." >> >> It's 2012. How does one get through to folks like this? I tried writing >> to them a few years ago, but I don't think they were impressed by an >> individual contribution. >> >> http://www.unece.org/cefact/locode/welcome.html >> >> -- >> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA >> http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell >> >> >> **** >> > >
