NEW-MODIFY LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION for "GB"
cowan at ccil.org
Fri Apr 21 00:29:58 CEST 2006
Kent Karlsson scripsit:
> 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...
Fortunately, the AX-FI split happened before our official
event horizon (Date B), and there was never anything, AFAIK,
saying that FI included AX.
> 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.
We'd need to know the history of usage here. Do people typically
use no or nb nowadays?
On the Semantic Web, it's too hard to prove John Cowan cowan at ccil.org
you're not a dog. --Bill de hOra http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
More information about the Ietf-languages