Request for variant subtag fr 16th-c 17th-c

Mark Davis mark.davis at
Wed Dec 13 18:56:09 CET 2006

> Mark, I found with your "cap-in-hand" remark to be offensive and
> dismissive. Now you want to play the Dr/Mr game?

Not particularly. When I look back over the email trail, I can see that
probably each person was taking offense at something that was probably not
meant to be offensive, so I withdraw any remarks I made that you found
offensive. (And by the way, I've seen some people without a college degree
outperform some with a doctorate -- I didn't mean my comments that way.
Sorry to have hit a sensitive spot.)

The main point I was trying to make is that with generative tags people can
form combinations that (a) are meaningful, and (b) don't require
registration. That is the whole purpose of RFC4646. We explicitly don't weed
out the empty combinations like en-Cyrl-AQ, because as long as the meaning
of the subtags is well-defined, it is interchangeable.

And to that degree, fr-1500s probably makes as much sense as fr-CA in terms
of defining a reasonably meaningful language-tag, and far more useful than
the perfectly legal en-Cyrl-AQ.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list