draft-phillips-langtags-08, process, specifications, "stability", and extensions

[Keld Jørn Simonsen]

On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 06:31:40AM -0800, ned.freed at mrochek.com wrote:
> > > For the triple of
> > > language/country/script to match usefully in the general case by
> > > RFC 3066 parsers (which are unaware of script in general), the first
> > > and second subtags would have to remain language code and country
> > > code respectively.
> 
> > If you consider realistic scenarios, this makes the wrong assumption that
> > country distinctions generally matter more to users.
> 
> If you want to consider realistic scenarios, it is often the case that country
> information is readily available as input to matching algorithms, whereas
> script information is not. Therefore the assumption that scripts matter more
> than countries may be true but isn't relevant.

I would also favour the country code as second field, as it would be
backwards compatible with RFC 3066, and also compatible with the order
used in locales.

Best regards
Keld

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf