<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="&#1;" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
 /* Font Definitions */
 @font-face
        {font-family:SimSun;
        panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:Tahoma;
        panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
        {font-family:"\@SimSun";
        panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0in;
        margin-bottom:.0001pt;
        font-size:12.0pt;
        font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:purple;
        text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
        color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
        {size:8.5in 11.0in;
        margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
        {page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
  <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
 </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>

<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>

<div class=Section1>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>If LTRU were not considering keeping the extlang formalism, it would
be conceivably feasible to deprecate “zh”. With extlang, however, I don’t see
how “zh” could be deprecated. Of course, I think what Karen has in mind is that
“zh-cmn” (or “zh-yue”, etc.) be used in preference to “zh” alone, but there is
no mechanism to indicate that certain subtag sequences (let alone the *<b>absence</b>*
of certain sequences) are deprecated.<o:p></o:p></span></p>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>

<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>

<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>

<div>

<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>

<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no
[mailto:ietf-languages-bounces@alvestrand.no] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Mark Davis<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 04, 2008 4:04 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Broome, Karen<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Kent Karlsson; ietf-languages@alvestrand.no<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: pinyin<o:p></o:p></span></p>

</div>

</div>

<p class=MsoNormal><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>

<div>

<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>I think you see some Dark
Conspiracy where there is none. My strong intention, shared I'm sure by others
on this list like John, is to add the prefixes zh-cmn and cmn, once those are
available.<br>
<br>
zh-guoyu cannot be added as a prefix, since zh-guoyu-pinyin would be illegal.<br>
zh-cmn also cannot be added as a prefix, under RFC4646<br>
<br>
Remember, prefixes are a guide for good usage, to indicate that other values
would be *inappropriate*. zh-cmn-Latn-pinyin makes sense, as does
zh-Latn-pinyin. But da-pinyin *doesn't*. It is cases like the latter than the
prefixes are designed to discourage.<br>
<br>
And zh is not deprecated in RFC4646, nor is it deprecated in the current text
of RFC4646bis, nor can I forsee that it would ever be deprecated.<br>
<br clear=all>
Mark<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>

<div>

<p class=MsoNormal>On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Broome, Karen &lt;<a
href="mailto:Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com">Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com</a>&gt;
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>

<div>

<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Addison writes:<br>
<br>
&gt;Note that 'cmn' would be added as a prefix when available.<o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<p class=MsoNormal>And zh-cmn too?<br>
<br>
This is where I think we create problems by not having a single preferred tag
for each of the Chinese variants. We know in the future &quot;zh&quot; will not
be a preferred tag, so I don't think &quot;zh-pinyin&quot; should be allowed
today. I wonder if this tag is being registered now because the registrant
intends to ignore the preferred Chinese tagging chosen by the committee in the
future and knows that in the RFC 4646bis era, it's less likely that new
&quot;zh&quot; tag variants would be allowed.<br>
<br>
I strongly believe that this request should be associated with the
&quot;cmn&quot; or &quot;zh-cmn&quot; tag ... but three valid prefixes for the
same thing? Might as well throw zh-guoyu in there too. If you don't, the
treatment of these tags is inconsistent. This is where I start to see this
standard as something less desirable than its predecessor for most uses of this
work -- it allows too many options for the same thing and the exceptions are
becoming harder and harder to explain. We can see the exponential nature of
these options in requests like this.<br>
<br>
For the purposes of registration, I think we should consider &quot;zh&quot;
deprecated. It may be a popular tag with a lot of legacy classifications, but
that doesn't make it specific enough to span use across the written and spoken
language identification needs of the Internet today. &quot;Zh&quot; is a Bad
Tag and we should discourage its use moving forward. &quot;zh-cmn&quot; is the
preferred tag for Mandarin today. If &quot;pinyin&quot; is a Mandarin-only
variant, it should use the Mandarin tag.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<span style='color:#888888'><br>
Karen Broome</span><o:p></o:p></p>

<div>

<div>

<p class=MsoNormal><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ietf-languages mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no">Ietf-languages@alvestrand.no</a><br>
<a href="http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages"
target="_blank">http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages</a><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

</div>

</div>

<p class=MsoNormal><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>

</div>

</div>

</div>

</body>

</html>