Re: [Ltru] Re: Punjabi

Yes, and it concerns me that we are baking in a particular view of the world
by requiring that some language tags can only be used in conjunction with
others (eg pmu can only be used with lah-pmu). Now maybe I'm missing
something, can you articulate the reasons why we must use lah-pmu (for
example) instead of just pmu?

Mark

On 3/16/07, John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> wrote:
>
> Mark Davis scripsit:
>
> > My concerns are that we are baking into place a hierarchy that may, in
> > actual practice, be cumbersome and not that useful.
>
> I understand the concern, but I point out that we don't know what the
> scope of actual practice will be.  For the first time we are extending
> language tagging to languages that either don't exist in written form at
> all, or are "written" by writing some closely related language.
> This opens up a whole new set of hitherto unknown applications.
>
> --
> I am expressing my opinion.  When my            John Cowan
> honorable and gallant friend is called,         cowan@ccil.org
> he will express his opinion.  This is           http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> the process which we call Debate.                   --Winston Churchill
>

-- 
Mark