<br clear="all">Mark<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 03:58, Kent Karlsson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kent.karlsson14@comhem.se">kent.karlsson14@comhem.se</a>></span> wrote:<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 2009-09-11 05.04, skrev "Doug Ewell" <<a href="mailto:doug@ewellic.org">doug@ewellic.org</a>>:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> Geez, all I had in mind for Korean was registering the three most common<br>
> romanizations, which anyone familiar with Korean could name off the top<br>
> of their head.<br>
<br>
</div>I would suggest that you just submit the appropriate registration forms<br>
to the list. I don't think there is the requirement that the submitter<br>
promises to "start using the subtag for the submitter's immediate needs",<br>
nor that the submitter has been using the variants for which subtags are<br>
requested. I think the subtags you allude to here are useful enough to be<br>
registered.<br></blockquote><div><br>No, but what I'm afraid of is that then someone else will say, well, we might as well do Thai romanizations, and then Lao, and then Russian, and then... There is a pretty unending supply of these things.<br>
<ol><li>"Are useful enough to be registered"</li><li>"Are useful enough to be registered, and someone has a need for it"</li></ol>I'm just saying that as a working process, #2 gets people what they need, and is manageable by this group. #1 would completely swamp this group.<br>
<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
/kent k<br>
<br>
PS<br>
This is in contrast to trying to register a subtag for a lone pronunciation<br>
quirk (by itself that hardly makes a dialect) or for using old road/highway<br>
names/numbers instead of their newer names/numbers (totally irrelevant for<br>
language tagging, methinks).<br></blockquote><div><br>Hardly makes a dialect? If you are referring to the example I gave, of en-US-socapgfr, it is probably spoken by as many or more people than speak your native language... <br>
<br>Of course, I was using an extreme example, but it was to make a point. For *somebody* that level of precision might be important, just as for *somebody* the distinction between sl-rozaj-biske and sl-rozaj-njiva, or between sl-rozaj-biske and sl-rozaj-biske-1994 is important. We can't anticipate all the possible differences that people might need, nor can or should we try to second guess that in advance, but what we can do is make sure that the right tags are at the right levels of breadth when we do get requests.<br>
<br>And transliterations are notoriously tricky. What we actually use in CLDR for Korean, for example, is a "Korean Ministry of Culture & Tourism Transliteration with Clause 8 And Further Modifications for Reversibility Because the Source is Underspecified". (<a href="http://cldr.unicode.org/index/cldr-spec/transliteration-guidelines#Korean">http://cldr.unicode.org/index/cldr-spec/transliteration-guidelines#Korean</a>)<br>
[Just noticed that we need to fix the links; the Ministry keeps moving the pages around -- sigh.]<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<font color="#888888"><br>
/k<br>
</font><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>