Occitan oddity

[Doug Ewell]

Mark Davis 🍹 <mark at macchiato dot com> wrote:

> I didn't get an exact match against Occitan. When I looked at the 
> registry, it has the somewhat odd formulation:
> ...
> Description: Occitan (post 1500)
> ...
> I thought I'd float this out, before filling out a form.

Let me guess, this is another attempt to make the Registry fit CLDR.

The Registry uses names from the core standards as Description fields 
whenever possible, with only the most trivial of modifications, like 
converting apostrophes and dashes.  The Reviewer and list reserve, but 
almost never exercise, the right to add other Description fields on top 
of these.

Some people on LTRU were very adamant that the exact ISO names be used, 
without even typographical changes.  I guess I assumed that debate was 
as fresh in other participants' minds as it was in mine.

"Interlingua" won't match "Interlingua (International Auxiliary Language 
Association)" either.  "Malay" won't match either "Malay (individual 
language)" or "Malay (macrolanguage)".  Exact matching by Description 
field isn't ever going to meet everyone's needs all the time; that's 
probably why we use short codes in the first place.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s ­