petercon at microsoft.com
Sat Mar 19 18:40:43 CET 2005
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Frank Ellermann
> Sure, use pt-MO or en-HK where needed. But don't abuse these
> codes in artificial tags for languages which are not directly
> related to MO or HK.
Chinese is not directly related to Macau and Hong Kong?
> de-LI, de-BE, and some others are also not unreasonable, quite
> the contrary. Dito zh-US and others. But I don't see why
> that's a reason to register all theoretical permutations under
> 3066 rules.
Who's trying to register all theoretical permutations?
> > Apparently you have either just joined the list
> Yes, because the new 3066bis idea of region codes is dubious,
> and adding these zh-hanZ-XY tags as grandfathered to a future
> 3066bis registry makes it worse.
They would not be considered "grandfathered".
> > script distinctions are almost always going to matter more
> > than regional dialect or spelling variations
> Not if it's a language with a "default" script like Latn.
But the requests are not for cases involving a "default" script like
Latn, are they.
> The last state was that en-Latn-US-boont won't match en-boont.
> Your idea to sort subtags by importance is fine, that could
> result in en-boont-Latn-US, de-1996-LI, zh-yue-SG, etc. Bye.
None of that has any relevance to the request at hand.
More information about the Ietf-languages