[Ltru] Tagging of silent films
petercon at microsoft.com
Wed Sep 28 23:39:40 CEST 2005
My real point was that "xxx" is a very bad choice of language tag for *any* purpose because there will be processes that filter that value on the assumption that it is used in relation to sexually-explicit material. It is not one you'll ever see assigned in ISO 639-3 for that reason.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marion Gunn [mailto:mgunn at egt.ie]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 11:09 AM
> To: Peter Constable
> Cc: ietf-languages at iana.org
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Tagging of silent films
> If you must seek such meanings as lie outside our field of work, Peter,
> then virtually any easily-identifiable combination (e.g. aaa, qqq) not
> normally occurring in any language will serve lagtagging purpose equally well.
> Scríobh Peter Constable wrote:
> > > Personally, I'd be all for deprecating the tag 'und' and replacing it
> > > with 'xxx' (a shorthand combination widely recognised across this
> > planet
> > > as indicating 'unknown/blank/yet to be filled in').
> > And also as widely recognized as indicating either 'poison' or
> > 'sexually-explicit content'.
> > Peter Constable
> Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
> 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
> Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
> * mgunn at egt.ie * eamonn at egt.ie *
More information about the Ietf-languages