RFC 4645bis: making 'pes' and 'prs' extlangs

[CE Whitehead]

Hi,
 
Yes thanks Kent, I now see the code tables: [pes] is described as 'Western Farsi' and [prs] as 'Dari'.  (At ethnologue.com [pes] is' Western Farsi' and [prs] is 'Eastern Farsi').  [fas] is a macrolanguage in the ISO 639-3 code tables and its description is Persian.  [per] is not in the code tables but is considered identical in referent to [fas].
 
Still I feel I bit more some clarification to understand this thread:
 
What exactly is being requested?  To use the subtags [pes] and [prs] as extension languages--with [fas]?
 
And to the other topic, which description field should be changed (that for [pes], that for [prs], both?)?
 
 
Thanks.
 
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com 
 
(Personally it makes sense to me to have both Western Farsi and Western Persian in the description field for [pes] [because both names are used to indicate that language--in English today]  but I am unsure still whether there can be multiple description fields in the code tables--if not then I personally prefer not to discuss the name further; I prefer to leave it to native speakers to decide.  As for the code [prs], I am not sure about changing the description field for Dari/Eastern Farsi/Eastern Persian; it seems o.k. as it is, but I am not a speaker, so it's not my call.)Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 01:45:44 +0100From: Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se>> Which has nothing to do with making them extlangs (which I take this thread> is about given the subject...).> > As for the entirely separate issue of description change, I see no need for> *ietf-languages*, as a group, to act on this towards the 639-3 RA. Indeed> there are several much worse description naming problems in 639-3...> > B.t.w. the primary description for "prs" in 639-3 is "Dari".> > /kent k
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20081205/60f29342/attachment.htm