New item in ISO 639-2 - Zaza

[Peter Constable]

> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of John Cowan


> 3) 639-3/RA (SIL) notices that this "Ryukyuan language" corresponds to 11
> different languages in its list, with codes 'ams', 'kzg', 'ryn', 'tkn',
> 'okn', 'ryu', 'xug', 'yox', 'mvi', 'rys', 'and' 'yoi'.  Therefore, it adds
> 'rkn' to its list of macrolanguages and specifies that it encompasses
> those 11 languages.

Clarification: IIUC the scenario you're describing is that these 11 are not newly added in 639-3 at the time of adding 'rkn' but rather already exist in 639-3 and (assuming 3066ter) are already in the subtag registry.

Or are you talking about now, in the interim while 3066bis is in effect but 3066ter is not yet? 

(I don't see a particular reason to consider the present interim; only the 3066ter era matters.)


> 6) Under option #1, we have two choices (again, the choice may have been
> made in advance by LTRU, but that doesn't affect the argument):
> 
> 6a) Add 'rkn' as a language subtag and immediately deprecate it, thus
> encouraging people to use the other tags instead.  This is what we do
> when ISO 3166/MA changes a country code element.
> 
> 6b) Add the 11 existing 639-3 code elements as extlang subtags, add 'rkn'
> as a language tag, and deprecate the 11 code elements as language subtags,
> specifying "rkn-XXX" as the preferred form.  This provides the cleanest
> long-term results.

We wouldn't be adding them if they're already in the registry.

It seems to me if the 11 are already in the registry, then our options are:

(a) do not add 'rkn' to the subtag registry; the 11 remain as primary language subtags

(b) add 'rkn'; change the 11 to extlangs and deprecate their use as primaries

(c) add 'rkn' and allow the 11 to be used either as primaries or as extlangs with xxx and rkn-xxx synonymous

(d) add 'rkn'; the 11 continue to be used as primaries but cannot be used as extlangs; we document the relationship in the registry so that matching processes can do the right thing (requiring a change to the matching algorithm)


Now, if you are talking about a scenario in which the 11 are not already in the registry, then there is no problem: add 'rkn' as a primary and add the 11 as extlangs. Period.

If you are talking about a scenario in the present interim, then there is no problem: add 'rkn'; the 11 are not available for use in 3066bis. Period.



 
Peter Constable