Re: wadegile and pinyin LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORMs

"Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org> Tue, 26 August 2008 00:14 UTC

Return-Path: <doug@ewellic.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1924239E6DD for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:14:24 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WVt9CtI4bD-E for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:14:23 +0200 (CEST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.6.8
Received: from pechora2.lax.icann.org (pechora2.icann.org [208.77.188.37]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B158839E69E for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:14:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtpout07.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpout07-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.233]) by pechora2.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id m7Q0EMZ9019151 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:14:42 -0700
Received: (qmail 18374 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2008 00:14:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (67.177.232.210) by smtpout07-04.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.233) with ESMTP; 26 Aug 2008 00:14:19 -0000
Message-ID: <6782C547D30442C580EE54C6B021E612@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
To: ietf-languages@iana.org
References: <mailman.4488.1219708963.6324.ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>
Subject: Re: wadegile and pinyin LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORMs
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:14:16 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.93.3, clamav-milter version 0.93.3 on pechora2.lax.icann.org
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora2.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.37]); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:14:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Language tag discussions <ietf-languages.alvestrand.no>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:14:24 -0000

Mark Davis <mark at macchiato dot com> wrote:

> I believe the answer was stated. We're applying for a tag for Chinese 
> Hanyu Pinyin and Wade-Giles romanizations. That cannot be done with 
> prefixes of cmn or zh-cmn according to RFC 4646, which is the current 
> specification in force for the IANA language subtag registry. If and 
> when RFC4646bis passes, we would then register cmn or zh-cmn also as a 
> prefix, but given the rate of progress so far, that is in the 
> indefinite future, perhaps never. Those would be specifically Mandarin 
> romanizations as opposed to Chinese romanizations.

It's clear that there is supposed to be a definite resolution within two 
weeks, even if that resolution is "wait two more weeks, we haven't 
decided yet."

However, as I remember, there were strong objections to allowing these 
subtags to combine with 'zh', and RFC 4646 doesn't allow a variant 
subtag to be attached to a grandfathered tag.  So if the strong 
objections are upheld, there isn't anything we can do unless and until 
RFC 4646bis passes.  (And I share your doubts as to whether this will 
ever happen, after a 24-day stretch with no business conducted on the 
LTRU list.)

> In any event, it is certainly well-defined, meaningful, and legitimate 
> to register "pinyin" and "wadegile" with the prefix "zh-Latn", as 
> meaning "Chinese momanizations"; they certainly exist and are in 
> widespread usage.

I thought this would be fine, but others are concerned that "zh-pinyin" 
could be used with other Chinese languages/dialects written in different 
romanizations that are also called "pinyin."  Apparently this would be 
bad.

If we register "zh" as a prefix, we can't ever take it away, because of 
the restriction against narrowing.  We can only add other prefixes.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ