recently-approved tags

JFC (Jefsey) Morfin jefsey at
Tue Apr 12 12:58:45 CEST 2005

Dear Tex,
You know that I fully share  this type of concerns. But I think this a 
matter of utter caution. I want a people's multilingual internet by the 
people for the people. Not out of political faith, but out of technical 
necessity for the network to stay together, because at the end of the day 
the people vote with their money.

To register lang3tags does not really harm. They are a need to patch the 
XML dead-end Addison Philips detailed on another list. The final solution 
will at least include lang-script-region-referent-style multilingual 
description as a necessary root of probably much more. So they do not 
conflict with the final solution which will swallow them. So there is an 
attitude problem but no real harm.

So, you are correct about this being unfortunate. We all know it is to test 
the capacity to oppose a certain way to read the IESG Charter of the 
WG-ltru and to push for another vision of the IANA langtags database. This 
vision includes registration authoritative approval, language preemption by 
the initial registrant, lack of cultural crosschecking, monolingualism. 
This is fully documented on another list. It would only result in a 
balkanization of the Internet, because it is an architectural layer 
violation confusing internationalization with multilingualization.

It is already quite helpfull that the IESG has identified the flaws of the 
preceding propositions: let imagine the situation if the first last calls 
had succeeded with texts now already substantially corrected and 
reorganized. Yet, there is still a lot to accomplish and thorny questions 
in the Charter to debate and address.

Now, the immediate problem is to try to make some people understand they go 
too far while making other people to still give them a chance and not to 
block the IETF. Not starting a language war is not very simple under the 
current circumstances. A war destroys: in a global system we would all lose.

As usual the danger comes from the "apprentis sorciers". This is why we 
must try to cool the situation - all the more if things blow-up. But to 
cool the situation is certainly not to give-up.


At 08:02 12/04/2005, Tex Texin wrote:
>However, approving (more) tags of the form lang-script-region presumes
>agreement for that format. Since we don't have agreement on a standard
>we don't know that this is the best choice. Potentially, registering
>more languages in this format locks us into a style for which we might
>ultimately regret. (Because it makes spec'ing an alternative more
>It would have been better to hold off and finish the standard.
>If there isn't an urgent need for the remainder it would be better to
>Peter Constable wrote:
> >
> > With the tags Michael has just approved, most of the tags Mark Davis and
> > I requested 2 1/2 months ago have been approved.
> >
> > Approved:
> > bs-Cyrl
> > bs-Latn
> > iu-Cans
> > iu-Latn
> > mn-Cyrl
> > mn-Mong
> > tg-Arab
> > tg-Cyrl
> > zh-Hant-HK
> > zh-Hans-HK
> > zh-Hant-CN
> > zh-Hans-CN
> > zh-Hant-TW
> > zh-Hans-TW
> > zh-Hant-SG
> > zh-Hans-SG
> > zh-Hant-MO
> > zh-Hans-MO
> >
> > The following were requested, but not approved on the grounds that
> > Inuktitut is spoken by a significant population only in Canada -- a
> > point that I conceded:
> >
> > iu-Cans-CA
> > iu-Latn-CA
> >
> > That leaves the following, which I'm still wondering about:
> >
> > bs-Cyrl-BA
> > bs-Latn-BA
> > tg-Arab-TJ
> > tg-Cyrl-TJ
> > mn-Cyrl-MN
> > mn-Mong-CN
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Peter Constable
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > Ietf-languages at
> >
>Tex Texin   cell: +1 781 789 1898   mailto:Tex at
>Xen Master                
>Making e-Business Work Around the World
>Ietf-languages mailing list
>Ietf-languages at

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list