Proposed modified records for 'cpe' and 'son'

[CE Whitehead]

Hi, I guess your solution is fine; other collection codes do not have a suppress-script field, but I am still wavering on a decision.
 
In any case, why is suppress-script not registered for any other collection codes?  (There seem to be individual language subtags registered for some of the language included in these collections & these do have the suppress-script field--but what is the point of having these subtags--are they to be used with the individual language subtags?  or alone?  or both?  if alone, is there any reason not to have a suppress-script when applicable other than expediency?  Is there any recommendation not to have it?)
 
Thanks.
 
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
 
 



From: petercon at microsoft.comTo: addison at amazon.com; kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se; cewcathar at hotmail.com; ietf-languages at iana.orgDate: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:21:45 -0800Subject: RE: Proposed modified records for 'cpe' and 'son'





Seems to make sense to me.
 
Peter
 


From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Phillips, AddisonSent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 1:06 PMTo: Kent Karlsson; CE Whitehead; ietf-languages at iana.orgSubject: RE: Proposed modified records for 'cpe' and 'son'
 
I concur with Kent.
 
Addison
 

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126
 
Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.
 



From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Kent KarlssonSent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 12:39 PMTo: CE Whitehead; ietf-languages at iana.orgSubject: Re: Proposed modified records for 'cpe' and 'son'
 
Note that "cpe" and "son" are codes for language *collections*, and they are the onlysuch codes that have a "suppress-script". Collection codes aren't recommended forlanguage tagging in the first place, and it is also unclear why these two codes ever gota "suppress-script". If collection codes are to have "suppress-script", I guess a fewother collection codes should have such a field too, if the languages in the collectionare all written the same script (but that would be a new take on collection codes,and how the manage them). Note also that these "suppress-script" fields wereadded at a time when the division into collection codes on the one hand, andmacro+individual language codes on the other hand, was unclear (probably notaffecting 'cpe', but maybe affecting 'son').So I still recommend removing the "suppress-script" field from the recordsfor 'cpe' and 'son'.    /kent kDen 2008-12-30 17.29, skrev "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar at hotmail.com>:
Hi, Doug, all:Make sure to remember to insert your correction to item 6 of the form for 'son'(and I am not sure about removing the suppress script for 'son' in any case; I'd need to research this more or abstain from commenting; I do think we can probably remove the suppress-script for "cpe"):> The second registration removes the Suppress-Script value of "Latn" from the collective language subtag "son".Thanks! Best wishes for the New Year. --C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar at hotmail.com > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:33:24 -0700> From: "Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>> Subject: Re: Proposed modified records for 'cpe' and 'son'> > The following two requests, to remove the Suppress-Script from 'cpe' and > 'son', were originated by Kent Karlsson last month. I posted these > forms on November 23 for a two-week review period, but for some reason, > they fell through the cracks. Since I'm usually the one who keeps track > of this stuff, I accept responsibility and apologize for this.> > Even though the review period has now gone on for more than five weeks, > I'd like to wait until the start of the new year before sending them to > Michael to submit to IANA. The urgency to make these changes doesn't > seem overwhelming, and it might be nice to give people a few extra days > to look at them during this busy Western holiday season.> > ----- Original Message ----- > > LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION> File-Date: 2009-01-01> %%> Type: language> Subtag: cpe> Description: Creoles and pidgins, English-based (Other)> Added: 2005-10-16> %%> > ===> > LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM> > 1. Name of requester: Doug Ewell> 2. E-mail address of requester: doug at ewellic.org> 3. Record Requested:> > Type: language> Subtag: cpe> Description: Creoles and pidgins, English-based (Other)> Comments:> > 4. Intended meaning of the subtag:> > 5. Reference to published description> of the language (book or article):> > 6. Any other relevant information:> > This registration removes the Suppress-Script value of "Latn" from> the collective language subtag "cpe".> > ===> > LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION> File-Date: 2009-01-01> %%> Type: language> Subtag: son> Description: Songhai languages> Added: 2005-10-16> %%> > ===> > LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM> > 1. Name of requester: Doug Ewell> 2. E-mail address of requester: doug at ewellic.org> 3. Record Requested:> > Type: language> Subtag: son> Description: Songhai languages> Comments:> > 4. Intended meaning of the subtag:> > 5. Reference to published description> of the language (book or article):> > 6. Any other relevant information:> > This registration removes the Suppress-Script value of "Latn" from> the collective language subtag "cpe".> > > --> Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14>> Evidently if a mistake is worth making, it is worth making twice.> > The second registration removes the Suppress-Script value of "Latn" from > the collective language subtag "son".> > --> Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14> http://www.ewellic.org



_______________________________________________Ietf-languages mailing listIetf-languages at alvestrand.nohttp://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20081230/4b6fab27/attachment-0001.htm