[Suppress-Script] Initial list of 300 languages

Doug Ewell dewell at adelphia.net
Wed Mar 15 07:25:32 CET 2006

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

>> As much as the discussion of manuscripts and the meaning of "Latg"
>> may be interesting, haven't we lost sight of what's actually needed?
>> Isn't it the case that we only need a suppress-script tag for
>> something like sga if that lang ID has been commonly used with a
>> country ID -- e.g. sga-IE? Somehow I think that's not the case for
>> sga or mga.
> I think so too.  But unfortunately, absence of evidence is not
> evidence of absence, and -- given the grave consequences of being
> wrong -- I think we have to assume that if a possibility exists it has
> been used.

 From a standpoint of trying to achieve perfection, that is true enough. 
But the nature of Suppress-Script is such that we cannot expect to 
achieve perfection.

I think if we had expected to have to supply an S-S value for every 
language that might ever have been used in a tag, except those *known* 
to be written in two or more scripts -- even so-called "dead" 
languages -- we would surely have concluded that the job was impossible, 
and would never have adopted S-S in the first place.

Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list