Script codes in RFC 3066
Caoimhin O Donnaile
caoimhin at smo.uhi.ac.uk
Wed Apr 9 13:46:29 CEST 2003
> > Given that the two would often be used in concert I think there would be a
> > strong advantage in making any script code look quite different to any
> > language code, whether to a computer or a human reader.
> So they do. Script codes are 4-letter strings, conventionally titlecased.
Are 3-letter codes going to be enough to cover all languages, including
all historical languages from all periods of history, all "new"
languages which may arise from reclassifications and obsoletion of old
codes, all dialects which may get promoted to "language" status
following more detailed study, and all dialects which may be
conveniently treated as languages for information processing purposes?
I don't know - I am just asking.
I think that language codes should be "atomic", not hierarchic,
because opinions on hierarchies are likely to change. Hence the
need for code space to have enough room from the beginning.
The hierarchic information should be handled by a database.
More information about the Ietf-languages