Re: [Ltru] draft-davis-t-langtag-ext

["Doug Ewell" <[e-mail]>]

Debbie Garside <debbie at ictmarketing dot co dot uk> wrote:

> Also, if my memory serves me correct, the responsibility for
> maintaining extension data was designed for private extensions not
> this type of extension where there is a more public use.

If you mean the 'x' singleton, as in "en-x-whatever", there are no
procedures.  You just make up the subtags and use them, and if you want
anyone else to understand them, you distribute a private agreement. 
These subtags don't have to be stabled, versioned, or freely available. 
They do have to be syntactically valid (e.g. 2*8alphanum), but that's
about it.

I just noticed that RFC 5646, Section 2.2.6 ("Extension Subtags"), item
3 says, "Note that there might not be a registry of these subtags."  I
missed this until now and wonder how it fits with Section 3.7, which
requires the extension RFC to specify the "URL location of the
registry."  Obviously that doesn't mean the IANA Language Tag Extensions
Registry; there would be no point in repeating that in every extension
RFC.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14
www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell ­