Moldovan

[Doug Ewell]

Arthur Reutenauer <arthur dot reutenauer at normalesup dot org> wrote:

>> "Type: language" is always a good starting point.  :-)
>
>  In that case, the region subtag (or rather absence thereof) also
> is one.  :-)

Sorry, I think my cryptic brevity has combined with yours in such a way 
as to obscure the topic completely.

Frank Ellermann had written:

> It took me at least five minutes to figure out that the
> language is the language, not the country, and therefore
> Cyril in Transnistria does not enter the picture.

I assumed he was talking about the proposed change to the language 
subtag 'mo' to add the Description field "Moldovan."  My response was 
meant to suggest that the line:

Type: language

in the proposed new record (or the existing record) is a good starting 
point to establish that the subtag in question is a language subtag. 
The region subtag 'MO' for Moldova is likewise unambiguously indicated 
by the line:

Type: region

A complete language *tag*, made up of individual subtags, might or might 
not include a region subtag, and that indeed might serve as a starting 
point for something (to determine whether or not the language usage 
being tagged was region-specific).  But we had been discussing 
individual subtags as they appear in the Registry, not complete tags. 
Am I still missing something?

--
Doug Ewell  *  Arvada, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ