Language subtag modification request: frr Suppress-Script Latn
nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Fri Feb 17 00:18:35 CET 2006
Tex Texin wrote:
> Doug, I wasn't question that the subtag be added.
That wasn't clear from your first article, where you proposed
to reject my request.
> But adding it and then modifying it, seems risky to me as a
> general rule. It creates opportunities for the tag to be
> used and then have its meaning subtly changed.
As far as I'n concerned it's fine to add 'frr' together with
Suppress-Script 'Latn' in one step. But that method works
only when a language tag is new, and the Suppress-Script is
mostly undisputed (as for 'frr').
It doesn't work that way with existing language tags, where a
Suppress-Script is "obviously" missing (like 'fy', 'oc', and
many more). Ot was the decision of the LTRU WH to leave these
details to this list (except from adopting Suppress-Scripts
listed in a reliable source for the most "obvious" cases like
Latn for 'en').
The critical point is of course the definition of "obvious" -
I'd be hard pressed to find a source / evidence for 'oc', and
with just one random link the result could be completely wrong.
> I was just offering a way to have the tag added without that
> risk, in the context of the rules that we are following.
So far "we" are _not_ following the rules, 'frr' and the other
tags in Doug's collection should be already in the registry as
specified in 3066bis section 3.3:
| Maintenance of the registry requires that as codes are assigned or
| withdrawn by ISO 639, ISO 15924, ISO 3166, and UN M.49, the Language
| Subtag Reviewer MUST evaluate each change, determine whether it
| conflicts with existing registry entries, and submit the information
| to IANA for inclusion in the registry. If a change takes place and
| the Language Subtag Reviewer does not do this in a timely manner,
| then any interested party MAY use the procedure in Section 3.5 to
| register the appropriate update.
In other words if 3.3 fails try 3.5 (explicit request). That
I've combined that with 3.4 clause 7 allowing to add 'Latn' in
one step should avoid what you and to a certain degree I fear,
the creation of numerous frr-Latn resources before the later
addition of Suppress-Script 'Latn' renders this as bad idea.
In that special case of course only a theoretical problem, the
10,000 speakers of that language probably don't know yet that
soon a much better tag than fy-DE will be registered, let alone
that there's now a 3066bis introducing Suppress-Scripts.
More information about the Ietf-languages