hakka + xiang (was: Request for variant subtag "boont")
cowan at ccil.org
Tue Aug 29 23:11:40 CEST 2006
Frank Ellermann scripsit:
> If the intention is to clean up grandfathered zh-tags it
> could in theory make sense. In practice this won't work,
> there's no way to get rid of the zh-min cruft.
We are not able to clean up zh-hakka and zh-xiang in the
current state of things. We can and should deprecate them
when 3066ter arrives.
> The boont + scouse cases are similar, if a parser has to
> handle en-GB-oed anyway, then removing boont and scouse
> doesn't help much.
These really are language variants, though, unlike Hakka
and Xiang which are separate languages (encompassed by
the Chinese macrolanguage).
> Maybe you could say that "oed" only affects en-GB, and
> boont and scouse variants would allow to parse all other
> en-tags (excl. en-GB) in the main code path. That's an
> implementation detail, should it affect the registry ?
I think so, yes. Current implementations are entitled to ignore
redundant entries altogether.
Only do what only you can do. John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
--Edsger W. Dijkstra's advice
to a student in search of a thesis
More information about the Ietf-languages