LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: pinyin

[Phillips, Addison]

Note: we can have both Prefixes. Variants are allowed to have multiples.

I think requiring the use of the 'Latn' subtag goes against the spirit of one of the language tagging maxims, which is: only use a subtag if it adds information. In fact, I think that the 'Latn' subtag adds no information to 'pinyin' or, for that matter, 'fonipa'. We shouldn't try to use the registry to enforce the exact tag for every situation.

On the other hand, suggesting the use of prefix "zh-Latn" in the registry does make clear(er) that probably a tag like "zh-Hant-HK-pinyin" has something wrong with it. So: both prefixes?

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Frank Ellermann
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 9:28 AM
> To: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: pinyin
> 
> Peter Constable wrote:
> 
> > I'd expect fewer to understand a relationship to Latn.
> 
> If the prefix zh-Latn (and later real languages + Latn)
> is registered, then for zh-pinyin *fewer* applications
> might still know the relationship, because it is in the
> registry.
> 
> OTOH if the prefix in the registry is only zh, then for
> zh-pinyin *fewer* boils down to *zero*.  Unless somebody
> went to the trouble to add a relationship info manually
> to their application.
> 
> IMO that doesn't scale => prefix zh is not good enough.
> 
>  Frank
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages