Registered sgn-* tags

Michael Everson everson at
Mon Jul 12 20:59:13 CEST 2004

At 11:38 -0700 2004-07-12, Mark Davis wrote:
>This is a good point, Michael. 3066bis does allow for tags in the future
>that would cover your requirements. The only problem is the syntax, not the
>semantics. sgn-BR works fine, since it is <lang>-<region>, but sgn-BE-fr
>doesn't, since it is <lang>-<region>-<lang>. So it is grandfathered in.

Well, it means "Belgian French Sign Language", and this productive 
mechanism should be available for extension.

That is, it should NOT be proscribed by 3066bis.

>So let's consider what we would do with a new tag such as "Spanish Sign
>Language as used in Canada".

That's not a credible tag.

See for a complete 
specification which outlines the scheme.

A simple fix to 3066bis, if it is going to proscribe this kind of 
thing, is to specifially allow the syntax as described in that 
document as permitted following, specifically, the 3-letter code 

>1. Register a language subtag 'sgnes' (registered language subtags can be 4
>or more letters). It would then automatically allow for the generative use
>of sgnes-CA or sgnes-US, etc.

This doesn't relate the the requirement.

The requirement has to do with identifying "Place-name's Sign 
Language" and also "Signed Spoken-Language". This is complex, but if 
you let what was developed in 2001 continue to work for tags 
following "sgn" then there won't be any disruption and the system can 
work as it does today.

>2. "sgn" is in an interesting way much like a script, and encoding a Script
>value 'Sign' would permit a wide variety of usages without *any* further
>registration required, like ms-Sign-TH (Malay Sign Language as used in

There are many ways that Sign Languages might be *written*. "sgn" is 
not like a script. It indicates a kind of language.
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list