Swiss german, spoken

Karen_Broome at Karen_Broome at
Mon Jun 13 21:25:58 CEST 2005

zh-cms or zh-cmn? Does this construction exist today or does it have the 
same problem as "gsw" -- it's not allowed unless 639-3 is published and 
included in RFC 3066? Were there some recent additions to the Chinese 

Ideally, I would also like to avoid using zh-Hant and zh-Hans without the 
Mandarin descriptor, though that will suit our business needs today. I 
just wanted to confirm that there aren't currently any registered codes 
that will allow me to express in a single code 


"Peter Constable" <petercon at>
Sent by: ietf-languages-bounces at
06/13/2005 12:18 PM

        To:     "IETF Languages Discussion" <ietf-languages at>
        Subject:        RE: Swiss german, spoken

> From: ietf-languages-bounces at [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at] On Behalf Of Karen_Broome at

> However, in Debbie's defense, here's why I need the distinctions
> spoken and written languages at Sony Pictures...

I don't think anybody here disagrees with the needs you describe.
Michael was only concerned that "spoken" in the name of the language
might suggest that the tag could only be used for audio content, which
isn't necessary in the case of gsw. But that doesn't contradict the need
in some applications to list possibilities for audio content without
including things that would be irrelevant for audio content, such as
"Chinese (Mandarin Traditional)". 

There is nothing in RFC 3066 or the draft revision 3066bis that limits
applications in this way. Indeed, the use of a script subtag in a case
like "zh-cms-Hant" will make it easier for applications to filter out
items that are irrelevant for audio content. This would not be possible
using atomic tags that merge the script and linguistic-variety
identities together.

Peter Constable
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list