Michael Everson everson at
Fri Feb 18 18:01:20 CET 2005

At 07:37 -0800 2005-02-18, Peter Constable wrote:

>So, with *that* in mind, put yourself in the place of someone deciding
>for each locale in a platform whether the appropriate language tag to
>return should or should not include a country ID. Facing a future in
>which you may be doing this for hundreds of cases, it would take a huge
>amount of resources to investigate such issues, with no guarantee that
>there will be one definite answer in any case. I think you can see that
>such a process ----- of determining when country IDs should or should
>not be included -- cannot work when you expand to hundreds of cases. It
>a problem even in single cases of fr-CC to know which CC values may be
>needed. (That's what I mean by a process that does not scale.) So, the
>solution is to say, we simply include the country ID for all cases.

The proposed solution of a particular vendor? Or does this have the 
consensual or unanimous support of, for instance, the participants of 
the CLDR?

What I see is a proliferation of tags with identical referents, and I 
don't see why that should be necessary or useful. I'm not 
particularly thick, either -- but neither do I see a bunch of *other* 
people on this list turning this around and explaining it to me why 
it's a good idea, and a needful one.

So I approved tg-Arab and tg-Cyrl (where was tg-Latn?), but not the 
ones specific to -TJ, because that seemed redundant.

I haven't "rejected" them, but I can't say that a case has been made 
-- or that opinion is overwhelming so that even if I don't "get it" I 
should trust the consensus of the community.

Please, community, duke it out and come to consensus.
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list