Kent Karlsson kentk at
Fri Apr 21 00:03:35 CEST 2006

I was kind of hoping this suggestion would just go away...

Otherwise we have exactly the same issue with AX and FI.
Note or not, FI presumably used to include Åland, now it
presumably does not (though I haven't followed the issue
closely). So sv-FI used to cover both Swedish as used in
Finland (excl. Åland) and as used in Åland, while now
they have separate codes, sv-FI and sv-AX. As it happens
they are not identical (as languages). However, sv-SE
(official, disregarding dialects) and sv-AX are identical
as languages...

Now, are we to note that in the LSTR?

And how about 'nn' and 'nb' vs. 'no'? There is no "guiding
comment" about those. In practice, I'd say 'no' is equvalent
to 'nb', even though 'no' should cover both 'nb' and 'nn'.
This one really needs some kind of guidance.

I'm sure there are other cases.

		/kent k

> File-Date: 2006-04-19
> %%
> Type: region
> Subtag: GB
> Description: United Kingdom
> Comments: as of 2006-03-29 GB no longer includes the Channel
> Islands and
>   Isle of Man; see GG, JE, IM
> Added: 2005-10-16
> %%

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list