RFC3066 bis: use of local codes

Mark Davis mark.davis at jtcsv.com
Sat Dec 6 02:08:14 CET 2003

No, the purpose is precisely to allow those codes, actually in preference to
x-anythinggoes, where they can be used. At least if the private use ISO codes
are used, one can still have a breakdown in terms of language/script/region, and
only the necessary ones are to be private use. Thus en-Qdej is more informative
than x-qwertyuiop.

► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Constable" <petercon at microsoft.com>
To: <ietf-languages at iana.org>
Sent: Fri, 2003 Dec 05 16:39
Subject: RFC3066 bis: use of local codes

The draft says that re the "local" (private-use) codes in ISO 639-2,
"These codes should be used for non-registered language subtags."

Similarly, re 15924 it says, " ISO 15924 reserves the codes Qaaa-Qtzz
for private use values. These codes should be used for non-registered
script values."

These statements are not at all clear to me. It sounds like people have
license to use, say,


It also sounds like they should use things like this rather than
"x-qka", "x-qka-Qdej" etc. But I'm not sure if it's meaning that or not.
It's also not clear whether "en-Qdej" is allowable or not.

Initially, I thought there was a typo, and that was had been intended
was to say that these should not be used. I think we could avoid some
confusion and headaches if we did not allow their use, with the
exception that anything is allowed to follow a primary subtag of "x-".


Peter Constable
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
Microsoft Windows Division

Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list