Latvian extlang subtags

[John Cowan]

Randy Presuhn scripsit:

> (a) was certainly a consideration.
> As far as I can recall, (b) was not.  I do not know why (b) would have been
> a valid criterion.  We would (I believe) have come to the same conclusion
> regarding 'zh' regardless of the Cantonese:Mandarin ratio.

If so, why did we exclude sq-als and sq-aln?  Precisely because
neither variety is dominant.  See, again, Peter Constable's list
at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg08904.html .
With the exception of sgn, the languages with extlang tags are precisely
those listed in his category 2, which he defines as "Macrolanguage ID used
in ICT, and there is a single, dominant variety".  That is no coincidence.

-- 
We are lost, lost.  No name, no business, no Precious, nothing.  Only empty.
Only hungry: yes, we are hungry.  A few little fishes, nassty bony little
fishes, for a poor creature, and they say death.  So wise they are; so just,
so very just.  --Gollum        cowan at ccil.org  http://ccil.org/~cowan