LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB

Peter Constable petercon at microsoft.com
Thu Apr 20 07:18:36 CEST 2006


If ISO 3166 used to say explicitly that GB included the Channel Islands
and the Isle of Man, then whether or not that made sense that was how
users were being guided in usage, and that has now changed. So I go back
to supporting the addition of the comment: IMO we should provide
appropriate guidance for users on this change in usage.


Peter



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Debbie Garside
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 10:33 AM
> To: 'Michael Everson'; 'IETF Languages Discussion'
> Subject: RE: LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB
> 
> > >If GB is considered to still include the islands, then no
> > comment is needed.
> >
> > GB oughtn't to have included them in the first place, I believe.
> 
> The problem, essentially, is that prior to 2006-03-29 GB included a
note
> stating that it did include the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
This
> note has now been deleted within the latest ISO 3166 Newsletter (as
> highlighted by Doug).
> 
> Hence the necessity (IMHO) for the comment within the registry.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Debbie
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
> > [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of
> > Michael Everson
> > Sent: 19 April 2006 14:53
> > To: IETF Languages Discussion
> > Subject: RE: LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION - GB
> >
> > At 06:38 -0700 2006-04-19, Peter Constable wrote:
> >
> > >I thought about this a little more this morning, and I
> > realized this is
> > >the heart of the issue: with the addition of IDs for the
> > islands, is GB
> > >still considered to include the islands, or does it
> > explicitly exclude
> > >them? E.g. would an existing Jerriais doc tagged fr-GB still be
> > >correctly, albeit sub-optimally, tagged, or is it now incorrectly
> > >tagged?
> >
> > GB is a code for the representation of the name of the United
> > Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, is it not?
> > Well, the Isle of Man is not and never has been a part of the
> > United Kingdom. The Queen is Lord of Mann, but the Isle of
> > Man is not a part of the Kingdom, and indeed is not a member
> > of the EU.
> >
> > >If GB is considered to still include the islands, then no
> > comment is needed.
> >
> > GB oughtn't to have included them in the first place, I believe.
> > --
> > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list