Re: extlang (was Re: Suggested language for "mis" (Re: [Ltru] RE: ISO 639-2 decision: "mis"))

I agree with Doug and John's comments over the past couple of days.

I also agree with Mark that there are certain problems with extended 
language subtagging. Notably, there are matching implications. I was 
able to address that in my own implementations by:

- using extended rather than basic filtering
- treating the primary plus extlang sequence as atomic in lookup

That is, the fallback from zh-yue-Hant goes:

  zh-yue-Hant
  zh-yue
  (default)

I guess I agree about adding "Macrolanguage" to the registry, except 
that extlang, if preserved, already indicates this with "Prefix".

Addison

-- 
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.

John Cowan wrote:
> Doug Ewell scripsit:
> 
>> That's only half true.  All Cantonese is Chinese, and since it's only 
>> been possible up to this point to tag Cantonese as "zh-something", it's 
>> reasonable to assume that much of it will continue to be tagged as 
>> "zh-something" in the future.
> 
> Or, indeed, as "zh" simpliciter, which is probably how most of it is
> tagged based on a simplistic subset of RFC 1766.
> 

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