Language Subtag Registration Form: variant "signed"
cowan at ccil.org
Sun Feb 26 03:55:18 CET 2006
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> If we assign "en" as a prefix, we cannot subsequently split it into
> "en-US" and "en-GB" and "en-IE". (See Section 3.4, item 4.) Doing so
> would exclude "en-AU" and "en-CA" and others, narrowing the set of
> prefixes rather than broadening it. We can only start with a narrow set
> of prefix definitions and broaden it, or else leave it alone.
Indeed, the current edition of Ethnologue speaks of
Australian Signed English on the Australian SL page
> Then please propose an extension as per Section 3.7. I'll work with you
> on it if you like. On the LTRU list I got a strong sense from most
> participants (which I did not share) that extensions were a horrible
> hack that should never actually come to pass.
Before getting formal about it, I'd like to get other input. To
reiterate, this would look like sgn-US-s-en(-us), and would mean
a signed variety of (American) English using the signs of American SL.
I am expressing my opinion. When my John Cowan
honorable and gallant friend is called, cowan at ccil.org
he will express his opinion. This is http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
the process which we call Debate. --Winston Churchill
More information about the Ietf-languages