Re: core components analysis, or what is this "Oxford English?"

["William J. Kammerer" <wkammerer@foresightcorp.com>]

Mary Kay Blantz wrote: "I'm not sure what you're saying about Oxford
English.  We EWG folks always use that, and I would assume we will do
the same for the joint X12/EWG committee.  If our current documents just
say 'English' then I think we need to change them to say 'Oxford
English.'"

Dear Mary Kay:

I had just told Hartmut Hermes there is no requirement anywhere that
"Oxford English" spelling be used.  Section 2.3, Globalization, of the
ebXML Requirements Specification Version 1.0 of 12 May 2000 simply
states "To simplify development efforts, all work shall use English."

Not only is there no ebXML requirement to use "Oxford English," I don't
think such a thing exists. Maybe it's an urban legend in the standards
community that you have to use this "Oxford English." I don't think I'm
being pedantic here - after all, I had just explained on Monday that
there's really only one English language, regardless of the minor
variations in spelling. There is something called the "Oxford English
Dictionary," published by the Oxford University Press, at
http://www.oed.com/.  Nowhere do they talk about "Oxford English."  If
the damn thing takes 20 volumes, they surely can manage to fit in the
American spellings (making them "Oxford English" spellings, as demanded
by Hartmut), used by most speakers of English as a mother tongue.

So, we're free to use "colour" or "color," "rationalise" or
"rationalize."  Hopefully, there will be some consistency in the names
of things stuck in the registry and repository to make lookup easier.
But when devising the specifications, there are far more important
things to worry about in these language wars, like avoiding the use of
"billion," which is a thousand times more in Britain than what we think
it is here in America.

If British spellings are to be mandated, then let somebody in TR&P
know - they use "recognized," "organizations," "organized," "realize,"
"utilize," and "authorized" all over the place - which are obvious
Americanizations. Or is that "Americanisations?"  The precious ebXML
Requirements Specification uses the American spellings.  Even the
Rosetta Stone of ebXML, ISO 11179, which I see referred to all the time,
uses American.  As does the ISO - the International Organization for
Standardization - itself.

William J. Kammerer
FORESIGHT Corp.
4950 Blazer Memorial Pkwy.
Dublin, OH USA 43017-3305
+1 614 791-1600

Visit FORESIGHT Corp. at http://www.foresightcorp.com/
"Commerce for a New World"