[tz] Busingen revisited

[Ian Abbott]

On 09/01/2013 18:22, Steffen Daode Nurpmeso wrote:
> Ian Abbott <abbotti at mev.co.uk> wrote:
>   |On 2013-01-09 14:47, Derick Rethans wrote:
>   |> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Sascha Wildner wrote:
>   |>
>   |>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:28:30 +0100, Arthur David Olson \
>   |.. <arthurdavidolson at gmail.com> wrote:
>   |>>> ++ Link    Europe/Zurich    Europe/Busingen
>   |>
>   |> And the one here above I would say? The "correct" transliteration with
>   |> be Europe/Buesingen.
>   |
>   |By the same rule, the "correct" transliteration of Europe/Zurich would
>   |be Europe/Zuerich, wouldn't it?  But we're using English zone names
>
> That is true in theory, but the swiss people are more relaxed in
> respect to their friendliness to the english speaking, and afaik.
> E.g., the Zürich Insurance renamed *themselve* to Zurich; i have
> a CD from »The Zurich String Quintet« (though they seem not to
> know exactly how to call themselves).

Zürich is well known enough in the English language to be given an 
anglified spelling ("Zurich"). I just mentioned it as an example because 
the spelling "Zuerich" would look *really* odd in English ...

>   |rather than transliterated zone names and I think either "Buesingen" or
>   |"Busingen" would do for the English name.  I've seen both used in a
>   |quick Google search, and the English Wikipedia redirects both spellings
>   |to "Büsingen".

... whereas Büsingen isn't really well known enough in English-speaking 
countries for an anglified version of the name to appear in English 
dictionaries (well, maybe the full-size OED is large enough to include 
it, but not the smaller dictionaries).

> Not that i really care, since these names are not ment for end
> users, as has been clarified multiple times in the last months…
> Maybe you are just ahead of our time.
> I'm against any mutilation of the German language, on principle.

You should see how the English spell Köln! Fortunately, it's not in the 
tz database. ;)