Script codes in RFC 3066
Sean M. Burke
sburke at cpan.org
Wed Apr 9 12:32:18 CEST 2003
At 4/9/2003 02:02 PM -0400, Martin Duerst wrote:
>So some piece of software (if thus specified) will always make use
>of the hierarchy; it is up to creators of tags and users of tags to
>make sure that this doesn't cause problems.
And as I implicated in my last message, hierarchical interpretations of the
language tag are just fine in most cases, and only occasionally
problematic, and never as bad as just random noise.
Note here that I'm talking about the hierarchical information IN a language
tag -- not the relateness hierarchy that we externally imagine for a
language itself. If you do or don't (or do! or don't!) want to treat
Haitian as being an instance of an entity Macro-French-based-Creole, that's
your own lookout, not something we need to shoe-horn into language tags.
(My mindset-du-jour is due to Piers Cawley, who said to me the other day
"Put it this way, how overengineered do you think something has to be
before the XML folks start to notice?" Caveats: he wasn't talking about
core XML, but some of the scarier behemoths being crafted out of it; and
there is no shortage of overengineering in the world that has nothing to do
Sean M. Burke sburke at cpan.org http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/
More information about the Ietf-languages