Problems deciding if az- should have multiple registrations...

Peter_Constable at Peter_Constable at
Mon Apr 14 17:39:12 CEST 2003

Addison Phillips wrote on 04/11/2003 12:46:33 PM:

> In any event, if language==locale ID, we really should fix the edge 
> cases of language tagging. There appears to be no resistence to the one 
> case I actually care about today (zh-*), but I find the problems with 
> the parallel example of az-* disturbing.
> I imagine that there are systems with locales that look like:
> az.ISO8859_1 at latin
> az-AZ.ISO8859_1 at latin

Is this an actual example, or only hypothetical? My impression was that 
Mark was concerned about interoperation with .Net, and I've already 
commented in another message that .Net makes a three-way distinction, and 
it does not include anything comparable to your example here.

> 1. *Are* we in agreement that RFC3066bis needs writing?

My vote is yes.

> 2. Why not register things that will become sanctioned in #1?

I see no problem with immediate registrations done in a 
forwardly-compatible way to meet immediate needs.

- Peter

Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list