Language Subtag Registration

[Peter Constable]

A problem with using the "u" extension is that it's only usable in protocols and applications that support the "u" extension, but not by BCP 47 implementations generally.


Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Ietf-languages [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015 5:45 AM
To: ietf-languages <ietf-languages at iana.org>
Cc: John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org>
Subject: Re: Language Subtag Registration

John Cowan wrote:

> I grant that I may be being too finicky here.  But it seems to me that 
> "en-CA-u-sd-canl" means "whatever English(es)" are spoken in 
> Newfoundland and Labrador, rather than the specific variety 
> Newfoundland English.

I did raise the possibility, in my original message, that the -canl tag might encompass too much. That said, I also suggested that it does not, unless there is a distinct "Labrador English," and I agree with Mark that the granularity that can be expected with subdivisions is comparable to what can be expected with regions. "de-DE" is known to be imperfectly broad, but can be still a useful tag; "de-DE-u-sd-deby" has the same strengths and weaknesses.

> It seems to me that since I live in NYC and speak English, that I 
> necessarily speak "en-US-u-sd-nyc", even though I do not speak English 
> with the New York City accent (non-rhotic, PRICE-CHOICE-merging, 
> non-hurry-furry-merging, etc.), which would be hypothetically 
> "en-US-nynyc".

You speak whatever you speak, regardless of where you live, grew up, or happen to be right now.

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

_______________________________________________
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages