<br><tt><font size=2>I agree with Randy's comment below that in many cases,
the fine-grained dialect identification is not always what's needed. I
think language tagging from a business perspective must be descriptive
and sometimes what you're describing is a cluster of variants, not a specific
variant. Just as we cluster Brooklyn, Georgia, and California variants
of en-US under the same tag, dude. There's no business reason to distinguish
them at present.</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Randy wrote:</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2><br>
> While tagging that distinction may be useful for some purpose, it's
far<br>
> too fine-grained for others. If someone someday needs to register
tags<br>
> for Glasgow or for obscure Slovenian dialects, fine. Though
I think English<br>
> as spoken in Fargo is "rather different" from English as
spoken in <br>
> Minneapolis, it would be insane to preclude registration of a variant</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> that included both, since for many purposes there
is no value in</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> making that distinction.<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>Regards,</font></tt>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Karen Broome<br>
Sony Pictures Entertainment<br>
</font>
<br>
<br>