Re: [Ltru] Re: Process for creating 4646bis Registry

Doug Ewell scripsit:

> Does it?  The Preferred-Values for the others are explicitly listed to 
> show how the tags were mapped.  The judgment of the WG is involved, 
> although I think in these cases it will be unassailable.  In the case of 
> "zh-min" the judgment of the WG is that (a) the tag is deprecated 
> because it doesn't refer to a real language and (b) there is no 
> Preferred-Value because no alternative tagging possibility exists for 
> this non-language.

It's a language collection in any case, encompassing 'mnp', 'cdo', 'nan',
and 'czo', and therefore should be deprecated for the same reasons
as the 639-2 collection subtags.

-- 
Normally I can handle panic attacks on my own;   John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
but panic is, at the moment, a way of life.      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru