LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM (R3): pinyin
nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Tue Sep 9 12:39:30 CEST 2008
Doug Ewell wrote:
> I did not realize that Michael had proposed to register 'pinyin'
> as a generic variant, and I agree that it should not be one,
> though ultimately it is Michael's call.
Dunno, his argument makes sense. And "generic variant" is all we
have for these cases until somebody creates an extension. Maybe
4646bis should allow for future extensions deprecating variants.
> I still maintain that the "generic variant" model is appropriate
> for variants that can truly apply to any language, such as IPA,
> and is not a bug.
Let's agree to disagree. The info "Latn" should be implied by
these variants (fonipa, fonupa, pinyin). Asking taggers to do
this "manually" is asking for trouble, some will, others won't.
Besides it would be massively redundant. We have no decent way
to store the "Latn" info in the registry. Comments don't help,
they are not for automatical processing.
More information about the Ietf-languages