Here's what I have to say aboutthat?

Michael Everson everson at
Wed May 28 02:41:53 CEST 2003

At 08:12 -0700 2003-05-27, Addison Phillips [wM] wrote:

>I also think that, if you feel strongly that the technical or 
>logistical criteria have not been met that, in your role as the 
>reviewer you should reject the specific tags that didn't meet the 
>standards and clearly state the reasons and possible remedial action 
>(if any) for the rejection. This is in both the spirit and letter of 
>the RFC. The next step would be to either rethink the proposals or 
>address the remedial items.

James Seng told me that Singapore uses Hans, but that its use of Hans 
is different than that used in CN. So zh-Hans doesn't work for 
Singapore. So, how do we deal with this? And what about zh-hakka, in 
Hant or Hans?

>Also: since Mark isn't asking you for any tags with country codes, 
>why is this an issue *now*? It would be reasonable to reject 
>zh-hant-CN (or zh-CN-hant, if you prefer) for this reason, but not 
>the nine in question.

Because the Tag Reviewer needs to have rules that can be applied 
generally, and it is easy to see that zh- has been extended, and that 
if script codes are added, there is a syntactic element which needs 
to be addressed.
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list