Doug Ewell doug at
Thu Jul 31 15:20:06 CEST 2008

Peter Constable <petercon at microsoft dot com> wrote:

> I'm inclined to think it a mistake for "fonipa" not to require "Latn". 
> The semantic principle we use in combining subtags is that subtags 
> added on the end add specificity / narrow the extension for the 
> overall semantic. Just as "Resian" qualifies "Slovenian", so also 
> "IPA" qualifies "Latin"; and comparably just as we would *not* 
> consider proposing that "rozaj" could be used without the "sl" prefix, 
> so also it seems entirely reasonable to me that "fonipa" could/should 
> be used with "Latn". Similarly, my initial reaction to the proposal is 
> that having "zh-Latn" as the prefix in each case is fine.

We don't currently require "en-US-boont" or "en-GB-scotland".

This is not a huge problem for me, just something I found a bit 
inconsistent, and perhaps contrary to what users might actually use, and 
to what some people have said about preferring the shortest tag.

Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14  ˆ

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list