kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se
Mon May 14 22:58:14 CEST 2007
Peter Constable wrote:
> >>we have the language-collection tags to represent partial ignorance,
> >>as when one knows that a document is in a Chamic language but
> >>not which one.
> >That is a conceivable use, but not one currently supported by ISO 639...
> >Use of a collection code is not recommended if there
> >is a more specific code available, according to ISO 639-2.
> I'm not sure on what basis these statements are made.
> ISO 639-2 says, "A collective language code is not
> intended to be used when an individual language code
> or another more specific collective language code is
> That's not quite the same as "is not recommended",
Then how do you interpret "is not intended"?
> nor does imply that the usage John describes is prohibited.
No, but apparently it is "not intended" for that.
> Also, it doesn't say what
> should happen when the user or application knows that
> the content is in a language that would be encompassed
> by the collection but is uncertain whether or not there
> is a more specific ID, which is precisely the scenario
> John has in mind.
As it stands, the code would then be 'und', which is the
only code given for use when the exact appropriate code is
More information about the Ietf-languages