ISO 639-3 language codes posted

[Doug Ewell]

John Cowan wrote:

> The new languages were rejected are pretty uniformly because they are
> dialects, not languages.  I move that the Official Doug be asked to
> grab these people's emails and send them a letter explaining what a
> variant tag is, and suggesting that they (severally) apply for them.

Getting users out of the mid-'90s, RFC 1766 mindset is a work in
progress. As evidenced by a recent CLDR ticket on pseudolocales, some
folks still think that "IETF language tags use language codes defined by
ISO 639-1/2 and region codes defined by ISO 3166" and believe there are
still "many existing systems that support only two-letter language
codes."

I can try. It's worth the effort.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org