hakka + xiang (was: Request for variant subtag "boont")
cowan at ccil.org
Wed Aug 30 00:58:01 CEST 2006
Peter Constable scripsit:
> We really should deprecate the zh-min-* tags since "min" in 639 has
> nothing to do with Chinese, and in 3066ter the language(s) in question
> will get a different tag generatively.
I'm proposing to leave them alone until the 3066ter transition, and
then to deprecate zh-min-nan in favor of zh-nan, and zh-min in favor
of nothing (it's a not-very-useful cover term for the Min subgroup
of Sinitic languages, viz. mnp cdo nan czo).
Is it too late to get Gaulish into the initial 639-3 registry
as a macrolanguage encompassing xcg (Cisalpine Gaulish) and xtg
(Transalpine Gaulish)? If this isn't done before 3066ter is
finalized, it's not worth doing. gsh is an available code element.
> > No real benefit for parsing zh tags: You have to look
> > for min and guoyu anyway, and at that point you can also
> > handle hakka and xiang.
> We already deprecated zh-guoyu prior to 3066bis.
Whether a tag is deprecated or not is important for taggers,
but not so important for tag validators -- a validator MUST
report deprecated tags as valid, though it may also
report them as deprecated.
You're a brave man! Go and break through the John Cowan
lines, and remember while you're out there cowan at ccil.org
risking life and limb through shot and shell, http://ccil.org/~cowan
we'll be in here thinking what a sucker you are!
--Rufus T. Firefly
More information about the Ietf-languages