LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: pinyin

[Doug Ewell]

Mark Davis <mark dot davis at icu dash project dot org> wrote:

> Agreed. Any other changes people think we should make?

1. Since both variants have a prefix of "zh-Latn", it might be 
considered redundant for the Description fields to say "Pinyin 
romanization of Chinese" and "Wade-Giles romanization of Chinese".  This 
is a minor quibble which I also have with descriptions like "The San 
Giorgio dialect of Resian", attached to a record with prefix "sl-rozaj" 
which already implies Resian.

2. By making the prefix "zh-Latn" instead of "zh", you are essentially 
requiring taggers to write "zh-Latn-pinyin" instead of "zh-pinyin", or 
"zh-Latn-TW-wadegile" instead of "zh-TW-wadegile".  I assume this is 
what you want.  It seems a bit contrary to what we discussed in LTRU 
about "fonipa" not requiring "Latn".

--
Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, 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