comments on the draft - extensions

jcowan at jcowan at
Fri Jun 11 19:22:01 CEST 2004

Peter Constable scripsit:

> Maybe there is a particular plan for the future that the authors have in
> mind, and perhaps a good plan. But I think it's only reasonable that
> there be at least some discussion of what kinds of future extensions
> might be considered appropriate, whether there is any concern of
> inappropriate extensions getting created ("courtyard" codes?), and
> whether there's any concern over every RFC 3066bis consumer needing to
> accept whatever extensions might come along.

I agree, and ceterum censeo that if these tags are to be used, originators
MUST sort them into alphabetical order (with "x" last, however).

An unrelated point: given the existence of "-x-", I don't see the
necessity of reserving all language-variety tags beginning with "x"
as well.  If you want "en-us-xboston", use "en-us-x-boston" instead;
similarly, if you have "en-Latin-xnyc-f-Arial" (Ghu forbid!) then use
"en-Latin-f-Arial-x-nyc" instead.  There are probably quite a few dialect
names in the Ethnologue beginning with "x", and there is no reason to
deny them the most appropriate label.

John Cowan                              jcowan at  
Humpty Dump Dublin squeaks through his norse
                Humpty Dump Dublin hath a horrible vorse
But for all his kinks English / And his irismanx brogues
                Humpty Dump Dublin's grandada of all rogues.  --Cousin James

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list