Add Likely Subtags first step

[John Cowan]

Doug Ewell scripsit:

> •    adding variant 'oxford' with prefix "en" and deprecating
> "en-GB-oed". I don't prefer something cryptic like 'oxendict' if
> 'oxford' is acceptable to all.

I prefer 'oxendict'.

> •    adding variant 'idefault' with prefix "en" and deprecating
> "i-default". This subtag value is better than 'default' (which I
> originally would have preferred) as the latter would have been
> misleading.

I am unalterably opposed to this.  RFC 5255 (IMAP extensions) uses i-default,
and isn't going to change, and probably no one else does.  Adding en-idefault
is useless.

> •    adding variant 'enochian' with prefix "art" and deprecating
> "i-enochian". (If you insist, that is. I'm still not sure what "not
> important enough" means.)

Historically it meant "has a literature", which entails "used by someone
other than the creator".  I don't think Enochian qualifies.

> •    adding variant 'mingo' with prefix 'see' and deprecating "i-mingo".

Agreed.

> •    deprecating "cel-gaulish" and adding a "see ..." Comments field
> with subtags alphabetized.

As noted, I'd prefer to omit the tags unless we can get authoritative
information on which they should be.

> •    adding a "see ..." Comments field to the already-deprecated
> "zh-min" (with subtags alphabetized), and hoping that will be the
> end of digital ink spilled over this ill-conceived tag.

Agreed.

Though when zh-min was assigned, the split of Min Chinese into four or
five varieties was not yet contemplated.  Min is essentially a subfamily
of Sinitic that split off from the rest of Sinitic before the Middle
Chinese period.  "Ill-conceived" is rather harsh.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
He that would foil me must use such weapons as I do, for I have not
fed my readers with straw, neither will I be confuted with stubble.
                        --Thomas Vaughan (1650)