[Fwd]: Response to Mark's message]

[Peter_Constable at sil.org]

Addison Phillips wrote on 04/09/2003 12:53:56 PM:

> I'm suggesting that we might need a specific document that says how to
> map a language identifier for use as a "locale". If that document could
> actually *be* RFC3066bis, it would save a lot of confusion. The text
> might say, for example...

Provided a clear distinction is maintained between tags for
linguistically-related distinctions (language/dialect/orthography/spelling
conventions) and "locales" (that vague legacy notion that has to do with a
variety of UI issues that go beyond the linguistically-related distinctions
mentioned above), I probably wouldn't object to that.



- Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485