Criteria for languages?

[John Cowan]

Randy Presuhn scripsit:

> The assumption is that it is better to introduce a (potentially
> lingering) imprecision in the tagging of legacy data, rather than to
> cause any once-accurate tags on legacy data to become incorrect.

That's a strong argument for 639-3/RA to do what they've been urged to
do: change "lav" to a macrolanguage and introduce "lvs" for Standard
Latvian and "ltg" for Latgalian.  But it doesn't address my question.

What I'm asking is: if proposal 2009-048 passes the RA, is it better
for interoperability if people who tag new data that they know to be in
standard Latvian use the "lav" tag or the new "lvs" tag?

-- 
Real FORTRAN programmers can program FORTRAN    John Cowan
in any language.  --Ed Post                     cowan at ccil.org