[Ltru] Re: extlang

Don Osborn <dzo at bisharat dot net> wrote:

> "Macrolanguage" is an interesting concept, but whatever its original 
> intent (and whatever linguists in general think of it), it seems bound 
> to accrue other meanings and applications. This is not necessarily bad 
> though it might complicate life for coding.

I think we would do well to remember that macrolanguages are a concept 
defined by ISO 639/RA, and we need to respect the concept as they have 
defined it regardless of how we choose to reflect it in language tags. 
As a WG we should not get involved in extending the concept, although 
some might wish to do so as individuals (and that is between them and 
ISO 639/RA).

There is such a diversity of interpretations of the macrolanguage 
concept on this list alone that I am concerned this WG will be 
perceived, both within and without, as responsible for (a) defining the 
concept, (b) extending the definition, or (c) assigning macrolanguages. 
None of this is our job.

--
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