Re: [Ltru] Extended language tags (long reply)

I think what might help is for us to draw up in detail what the matching
algorithms (changes to 4747) would be like in either of the two proposals,
and look at what happens with different cases 'ar', 'zh', 'no', and others.

Mark

On 10/7/07, Andrew Cunningham <lang.support@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 08/10/2007, Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > So, for me, the main issue is whether we are going to explicitly break
> > the connection between the language and its macrolanguage (at the tag
> > level). In some cases (Norwegian) we already know this can be
> > problematic; in others, it may actually be desirable.
> >
>
> It probably comes down to philosophical differences.
>
> So, cutting to the chase, which way forward?
>
> Andrew
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>

-- 
Mark