Hoi,<br>There is a difference between the literature of the Dutch and the Belgians. Given the prominence of libraries in the history of the ISO-639 I expect that this is an explanation for this.<br>Thanks,<br> Gerard<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/6/17 Kent Karlsson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kent.karlsson14@comhem.se">kent.karlsson14@comhem.se</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
Den 2009-06-17 04.04, skrev "Doug Ewell" <<a href="mailto:doug@ewellic.org">doug@ewellic.org</a>>:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> The ISO 639 RAs have assigned two names to this language -- "Catalan;<br>
><br>
Valencian" -- an approach they have taken with other languages as well,<br>
><br>
including Spanish and Dutch. That should be sufficient.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>Which brings us to the question what 'vls' (included in the<br>
registry update that soon, hopefully, will be approved) stands for.<br>
<br>
Type: language<br>
Subtag: vls<br>
Description: Vlaams<br>
<br>
Compare:<br>
Type: language<br>
Subtag: nl<br>
Description: Dutch<br>
Description: Flemish<br>
<br>
Note that "Vlaams" is the Dutch word for "Flemish". There<br>
*may* be a linguistic distinction to be made (such as<br>
West Flemish (West-Vlaams) vs. East Flemish (Oost-Vlaams)).<br>
But that is far from clear from the ISO 639-3 descriptions.<br>
<br>
I'm not suggesting that ietf-languages debates this, it is<br>
an issue for the ISO 639-3 registration authority.<br>
<br>
/kent k<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<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><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>