[Ltru] Re: Extended language tags

Shawn Steele <Shawn dot Steele at microsoft dot com> wrote:

> * Even for the current tags, many of the people in the teleconference 
> seem to extend RFC 4647 in ways that are best for them.  Strict use of 
> 4647 behavior seems rare.  It seems reasonable to me to expect that in 
> the future people may continue to do so and that RFC 4647 and the 
> registry can only provide guidelines.

I agree with the part about RFC 4647, but not the Registry, at least not 
in blanket terms.

The Registry contains some fields that are normative and some that are 
informative.  For the informative stuff, say Suppress-Script, it's very 
reasonable to expect that some people will ignore the warnings and write 
"en-Latn", and all we can do is tell them they shouldn't.  But anyone 
who uses the normative data in a "non-strict" way is tagging 
incorrectly.  This might include things like using "eng" for English 
(ISO 639-2 code) or "jp" for Japanese (by false analogy with 'JP" for 
Japan).

Shawn probably did not mean what I took his comment to mean.

--
Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

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