language tag structure

JFC (Jefsey) Morfin jefsey at
Tue Jan 18 02:12:51 CET 2005

At 18:55 17/01/2005, Jon Hanna wrote:
> > needs, the response is "no one will ever need this".
>That's not the argument. Sure people may need this. I need to figure out how
>to get emulsion paint off a leather coat, but don't expect RFC 3066bis to

Dear Jon,
as you may have noted I do not discuss the Philips-languages-08.txt Draft. 
I described the 5 sub-tags tag structure our CRC will adopt unless someone 
documents that more are needed.

>It is perfectly possible to come up with an ontology for mechanisms used to
>record text (e.g. handwritten, typed, whatever), we don't need 3066bis to
>record every possible datum about a piece of text or we'll end-up with some
>Borgesian impossibility.

This is not what is discussed. What is discussed is how/if the our stag 
structure is to be organized to support the Philips-languages-08(09?).txt 
requirements. My reading of the whole debate is that the information 
covered by these two sub-tags (which we see necessary in an heterogenous 
network environment) is of no interest to you in an existing document.

So, I do not understand why you comments the style and authority sub-tags 
you do not want to use.

The real possible conflicts I see, and I am surprised no one comments them, 
1. the IRI name-reg issue. A part from quoting the Gospel in an obscure 
way, I would wish to get an authorized response.
2. the need of IANA registration of the langtags I think inappropriate 
unless it is documented as a way to fullfil a specific need. For example 
the "ietf-language at" mailing list implications are very bizare.


>Jon Hanna
>Work: <>
>Play: <>
>Chat: <irc://>
>Ietf-languages mailing list
>Ietf-languages at

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list