randy_presuhn at mindspring.com
Thu Sep 6 20:57:14 CEST 2007
> From: "John Cowan" <cowan at ccil.org>
> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon at microsoft.com>
> Cc: <ietf-languages at iana.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Konkani Suppress-Script
> Indeed. Collecting samples can serve as evidence that a particular script
> is in use for Konkani, but it cannot serve as evidence that one particular
> script is dominant.
Mere dominance isn't enough. RFC 4646 says:
The field 'Suppress-Script' MUST only appear in records whose 'Type'
field-value is 'language'. This field MUST NOT appear more than one
time in a record. This field indicates a script used to write the
overwhelming majority of documents for the given language and that
therefore adds no distinguishing information to a language tag. It
helps ensure greater compatibility between the language tags
generated according to the rules in this document and language tags
and tag processors or consumers based on RFC 3066. For example,
virtually all Icelandic documents are written in the Latin script,
making the subtag 'Latn' redundant in the tag "is-Latn".
In this particular case, all the sources cited so far seem to indicate that
no particular script meets the "overwhelming" requirement for this language.
One might also call into question whether there is a sufficient corpus of
data in this language that was tagged under the RFC 3066 regime to
make compatibility an issue. *Either* of these points would be sufficient
to justify removal of the inappropriate "Suppress-Script".
More information about the Ietf-languages