The limit of language codes

Marion Gunn mgunn at egt.ie
Tue Feb 20 12:45:53 CET 2007


Trying to silence discussion never solved a problem, Doug.

These are the facts:
1. Great Britain (GB) excludes Ireland;
2. United Kingdom (UK) includes part of Ireland.
3. Inability/refusal to accept that difference also tends to mark  
people unable/unwilling to accept the difference between Iran and  
Iraq.:-(

The specific importance of such difference to laguage tag matters may  
be thus illustrated:
4. ga-uk, gd-uk, cy-uk, en-uk all make sense;
5. gd-gb, cy-gb, en-gb also make sense;
6. ga-gb makes no sense (see 1 above).
7. ga-gb is very misleading (ditto).

Can anyone say who are the members of ISO 3166/RA, and what position  
each of those individuals took on the misleading nature of ga-gb when  
their most recent debate on this matter took place, Doug?
mg

On 19 Feb 2007, at 20:53, scríobh Doug Ewell:

> Marion Gunn <mgunn at egt dot ie> wrote:
>
>
>> Inevitably en-uk.
>>
>> Instinctively.
>>
>
> When ISO 3166/MA withdraws GB as their code element for United  
> Kingdom and assigns UK in its place, we can have this discussion.

- -
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* mgunn at egt.ie * eamonn at egt.ie *



More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list