Re: [Ltru] Macrolanguage usage

[Peter Constable <[e-mail]>]

> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
> Kent Karlsson


> 2) Even when fallback to language tag prefix does apply, it is more
>    often than not inappropriate to fall back to a macrolanguage...

I'd suggest that, in just those cases, it's probably not helpful, in general, to tag content/resources with the macrolanguage ID. Of course, that is just what librarians have sometimes done, though their situation may be exceptional: I suspect they do this when dealing with smaller volumes of content and/or in languages of lower demand such that it is not cost effective to tag the content more specifically.


> > > So a no-extlang model is simpler to explain and apply, and
> >
> > For whom?
>
> Everyone. Users, software developers, you and me, this WG, IETF,
> IANA, ...
> A language code can then always be in the first position, not sometimes
> mostly arbitrarily forced to be in the second position (as an extlang).
> It will not introduce new false fallback to prefix, not introduce new
> politically sensitive fallbacks/prefixes, leave users with more easily
> managed language preference lists, etc.

This covers concerns expressed to me about complexity of extlang.


Peter
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru