Region subtags under 3066 and 3066bis (long)
JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
jefsey at jefsey.com
Sun Feb 20 11:30:20 CET 2005
At 06:22 20/02/2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> > I may have fully missed your point?
>Two points: If anybody confused FK and FQ it wasn't me.
No one confused FK and FQ. You confused the question.
You used the case of FQ and soved it IMHO wrongly in quoting TF. I rose the
case where Malvinas/Falkland would be suppressed as FQ was and asked where
you would put it. My point is that the IETF is not in the business of
deciding/discunting what country are or should be. I fully documented why
we chose RFC 3166 alpha-2 in a context which is NOT the context of
languages. And why using a political grid instead of a geographical grid to
support linguistic table is the source of all these unnecessary debates.
>And "blood and soil" is a case of "Godwin". Bye, Frank
Soil, blood and flag are the traditionnal source of nationality right. You
may be a citizen of a country by right of the soil (where you are born), by
right of the blood (the citizenship of parents you are born from), the
decision of a State (naturalization). The order of priority of soil, blood
and flag defintes the policy of citizenship. In the case of the study of
languages the priority should be to the soil (geographical), then to blood
(emigrations), then flag (influence of the political sovereignty changes).
For example the debate over "CS" is absurd.
More information about the Ietf-languages