Re: [Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field

-1

I think this is outside of the scope of the registry. Where will this stop?
Population of languages? Geographic area spoken? Population density? .....

The purpose of the registry is to distinguish one language from another. No
more, no less.

Mark

On 10/9/06, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 09:42:00AM -0400,
> John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote
> a message of 72 lines which said:
>
> > A proposal:
>
> +1
>
> > The 4646bis registry should capture the language type information
> > from ISO 639-3.  Each language, including macrolanguages, is labeled
> > in -3 as either living, extinct, ancient, historic, or constructed.
>
> I think the more information, the better (*), IF AND ONLY IF:
>
> ** this new information does not require a new source when building
> the registry, (because such a new source would complicate the building
> process and would add one more dependency, would add one more standard
> to track, etc),
>
> ** this new tag does not bother the existing parsers.
>
> To me, this proposal comply with these two rules, so I agree with.
>
> (*) : I let the UI people decide if this is useful for the specific
> issue of trimming the language list ; but, even if they do not use it,
> others may be.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>