LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM (R3): pinyin
doug at ewellic.org
Tue Sep 9 03:42:04 CEST 2008
Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:
>> I trust that this compromise will prove satisfactory.
> Actually this again shows that the possibility of
> "generic variants" are a bug in RFC 4646.
> What is really needed is an extension registry for
> this zoo (fonipa, fonupa, pinyin, ...), but as long
> as nobody creates it, and as long as this ugly hole
> in RFC 4646 permits such "generic variant" kludges,
> go for it.
The question of whether to assign "zh" or "zh-Latn" as the Prefix for
'pinyin' has NOTHING to do with generic variants. Where did that come
from? Nobody has seriously proposed making 'pinyin' a generic variant
like 'fonipa'. At most they have suggested that a small set of
languages be added as multiple Prefix fields.
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
More information about the Ietf-languages