Re: [Ltru] Re: Description on tags, not just subtags?

To avoid resuming the 1870 war, could it be agreed that:

1. linguistics is not an exact science
2. several langtags can refer to the same language name, content,
classification, filtering, locale file, ... whatever they are used for?
3. the authoritative reference is the locutor/allocutor couple?

What is discussed here belongs to local documentation organization (langtags
concatenation), not to IETF protocols. The RFC should simply explain how all
the possible forms of tagging can be handled at local application layer. How
new real life tagging can be discovered and supported. IMHO going any
further leads to being trapped into nationalistic issues, as expressed by
Frank. They may have local but have no global legitimacy.

2008/1/8, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>:
>
> Nicholas Shanks wrote:
>
> > I'll wager that those using de-FR, als and so on are not even
> > looking at the registry, and probably don't know it exists.
>
> "de-FR" and "als" are rather different, the latter is just wrong.
>
> The former was a sound workaround for Alsatian before the new
> "gsw" was introduced (2006), and until everybody learns that it
> exists, and that it's supposed to encompass Alsatian.
>
> "de-FR" is still a good workaround for any German language used
> in France if the tagger has no clue which of these languages it
> is - Alsatian isn't the only game in twown ;-)
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franconian_languages> contains
> some examples, in this or another article I found that the
> German language spoken in Strasbourg is neither "Franconian"
> nor "Alemanic" but a variant of "High German".  Stéphane picked
> an interesting can of worms with his proposal.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>

-- 
LB