Re: [Ietf-languages] "Black ASL"

Are there other cases where a sub tag is generated prior to a language tag
via iso 639-3? It just seems cleaner if 639-3 has a chance of being
generated prior to implementation in the sub tag registry. Less chances of
two tags representing the same conceptual entity.

I thought that in the past we had referred people to apply to the ISO 639-3
first.  Otherwise don’t we create a race condition to become the easiest
entity to apply to?

Kind regards,
Hugh

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 12:59 PM Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
wrote:

> On the basis of this comment I have no particular objection to registering
> “blasl"
>
> > On 18 Jul 2023, at 20:57, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
> >
> > My recommendation is to go ahead accept "blackasl" as a variant subtag.
> At worst, if the RA decides to act, we can deprecate it.  Our process is
> meant to be lightweight.
>
> Is this urgent? If not, then an answer from Hill and McCaskill about their
> recommendations (639-3 or BCP 47) would be good. Buy-in from the user
> community would too (perhaps more relevant for 639-3).
>
> As a dialect a subtag seems reasonable. As a collection of very different
> dialects… well, as I say, in terms of the “lightweightness” the subtag is
> probably reasonable as it is.
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>
-- 
All the best,
-Hugh

Sent from my iPhone