Proposal for a new variant subtag of the french language (fr)
petercon at microsoft.com
Tue Dec 11 03:12:37 CET 2007
This is not about an artificial language; it's about an invented, non-conventional orthography (or set of orthographies) for French.
If there is a persistent user community beyond just the inventors that want to use this, then I think it's a reasonable candidate for a tag. We just want to see evidence that this has such a user community. We don't want to register tags that aren't going to get used except by a small group of inventors or for an insignificantly-short period of time.
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of CE Whitehead
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 4:30 PM
To: ietf-languages at iana.org
Subject: RE: Proposal for a new variant subtag of the french language (fr)
I think if there are people using this spelling, and there are pages online using it, then this registration request does meet requirements;
both artificial or invented languages and natural languages are languages;
I see nothing saying that we register natural languages only.
If some members object, I hope their objections will be reasonable so that this process does not get to be arbitrary.
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com<mailto:cewcathar at hotmail.com>
> From: dewell at roadrunner.com
> >> The ietf-languages group may not wish to be known as the place where
> >> people go to get their own inventions registered, similar to Omniglot
> >> or LangMaker for constructed scripts.
> > Doesn't matter. The question is simply whether the registration
> > request meets the requirements established by RFC 4646.
> Section 3.5 provides for the possibility of registration requests being
> rejected "because of significant objections raised on the list." I'm
> raising, if not significant objections, at least some legitimate
> questions that I feel merit answers, lest they turn into significant
> objections. I don't see any process failure here.
Hmmf, let's not be arbitrary at least.
> CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:
> > As for Doug's objection, I have to say that I concur with Randy--
> > if it is used online, we register it.
> I have three pages on my Web site describing my invented script and four
> pages of sample text in that script, encoded using the Unicode PUA and
> displayable using a well-known, freely available font. Should I propose
> a variant subtag for my script? (Answer: No.)
(I never voted 'no')
> Michael Everson <everson at evertype dot com> wrote:
> > Why are you all just full of hate?
> Two years ago I suggested registering a language subtag for Unilingua, a
> language constructed in 1965 and the subject of a Featured Book(tm) on
> Wikibooks. The suggestion was shot down like a slow duck with a red
> bull's-eye painted on its side. Should I propose it again? (Answer:
> What is so different about M. Périard's orthography? Is it that he got
> the City of Montréal to include a few pages on their site? Is it that
> he has a major university research group behind his effort? I don't
> know what the guidelines are.
> Doug Ewell * Fullerton, California, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages ^
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages