Sign languages (was: Re: additions to ISO 639 and the IANA
language subtag registry)
petercon at microsoft.com
Mon Feb 27 00:57:48 CET 2006
> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
> At 17:59 -0800 2006-02-20, Mark Davis wrote:
> >I agree with Doug's comments. The use of "sgn-xxx" was never a
> >particularly way of tagging, since it implies that there is some
> >level of shared comprehension between "sgn-xxx" and "sgn-yyy".
> Well, it doesn't *have* to. Just because this sort of hierarchy
> applies to spoken languages does not mean that we cannot (for good
> reason) treat Sign Languages differently.
> And one way they are different is that a Sign Language's signs may be
> used to represent a spoken language's grammar in a particular way.
Michael, you're confusing the question of whether signed languages have unique linguistic characteristics that make them different from oral languages with the question of whether *identification* and language-tag-processing issues are different for signed languages and oral languages.
There are algorithms designed for matching identifier tags; those algorithms are designed to work in the same way for all 3066pri/bis/ter tags regardless of what the tags signify. Having special-case tags for certain languages only means added complexity for matching algorithms since the general principles are no longer generalized.
That is what Mark is talking about.
More information about the Ietf-languages