Summary: de-DE-1996 is better than de-1996-DE

[Martin Duerst]

At 18:18 02/04/30 +0200, Keld J$B�S(Bn Simonsen wrote:
>I prefer de-DE-1996

Same for me. I could live with de-1996-DE if there would be clear
arguments for that to be better, but I haven't seen any yet.
I have nothing against registering de-1996.

Regards,   Martin.



>Keld
>
>On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 02:05:35PM +0100, Michael Everson wrote:
> > The Language Tag Reviewer is Unhappy.
> >
> > The German tags are on hold and are not yet registered by IANA. I
> > want you all to come to consensus as to whether you want de-DE-1996
> > or de-1996-DE.
> >
> > Achieving his may involve "I can live with either" as opposed to "I
> > cannot live with one of these".
> >
> > I find both rationales equally unconvincing at times. Personally I
> > prefer de-DE, and no, I don't mind that there is a de-1996. Frankly I
> > consider these arbitrary identifiers. It is nice if they are
> > mnemonic. I don't care if software can "parse" them because I don't
> > think that's very reasonable.
> >
> > Please give a clear and unambiguous "I prefer X" and indicate whether
> > you can live with the other or not.
> >
> > Doing my best,
> > --
> > Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf-languages mailing list
>Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
>http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages