wadegile and pinyin LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORMs
mark at macchiato.com
Tue Aug 26 03:37:22 CEST 2008
I'm sorry if I didn't answer you before; I thought I had.
I didn't take it as improper for you to ask, I just didn't see why it would
be blocking these registrations (it sounds like it isn't, but I'm not sure
from your wording).
We have no objections to other romanizations being proposed, we just don't
need any others ourselves, currently. I don't have any more information than
that -- our product groups need to be able to distinguish those, but don't
have a current need to distinguish others, at least yet. If and when they
need others, I'm sure I'll hear about it.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Michael Everson <everson at evertype.com>wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
> *From: *"Mark Davis" <mark at macchiato.com>
> *Date: *26 August 2008 00:33:31 IST
> *To: *"Michael Everson" <everson at evertype.com>
> *Subject: **Re: wadegile and pinyin LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORMs*
> The answer is that there is no requirement in BCP47 that all possible
> variant subtags for a given language be registered at once.
> I am aware of that.
> When arevela or 1996 or 1606nict or any other variant was registered, there
> was no call for all possible subtags for the base languages be registered.
> Now, as you know, we have found the need to register a Belarussian variant
> subtag contrasting with tarask, but that didn't block the initial
> registration of tarask: it is only that nobody at the time saw a need for
> it, which is now being addressed.
> There's nothing wrong with me asking Why didn't you think of a particularly
> important Taiwanese romanization that is used in a lot of inputting
> If others want to register additional variant subtags for Chinese
> romanizations, that is up to them to make a proposal. We only have need for
> these two, at the current time. If and when we need more, if they haven't be
> yet registered we'll make a proposal at that time.
> There is nothing improper about my asking you to think about whether it
> would also be valuable to you, now or in the future, to register one or more
> additional tags. It's not really OK for you to have ignored my queries,
> which were addressed to you. I understand that Google has certain interests.
> I believed I was asking a question congruent with those interests.
> Please respond to my question with respect to the additional orthographies
> I mentioned.
> Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages