Re: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

Mark Davis scripsit:

> I have been a strong proponent of RFC 4646. But I can't see any way to sell
> software developers on the ways in which extlang would require a radical
> change, eg that the Accept-Language value meaning 'Mandarin then French'
> would be
> 
>    - under RFC 4646: "zh, fr"
>    - under this proposal: "zh-cmn, zh, fr, zh-cjy;q=0, zh-cpx;q=0,
>    zh-czh;q=0, zh-czo;q=0, zh-gan;q=0, zh-hak;q=0, zh-hsn;q=0, zh-mnp;q=0,
>    zh-nan;q=0, zh-wuu;q=0, zh-yue;q=0".

Actually, to get *exactly* the same effect under RFC 4646 you'd need to
say "zh-cmn, zh, fr, zh-gan;q=0, zh-hakka;q=0, zh-min-nan;q=0, zh-wuu;q=0;
zh-xiang;q=0, zh-yue;q=0", and that's not counting the deprecated forms.

-- 
In politics, obedience and support      John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
are the same thing.  --Hannah Arendt    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru