Peter Constable petercon at
Thu Jul 31 17:41:59 CEST 2008

> From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan at]

> Why strongly encourage people to write en-Latn-US-fonipa instead of
> just
> en-US-fonipa?  Since "fonipa" *implies* Latin script, there is no
> reason
> I can see to urge people to use the "Latn" tag with it.

See my comments just sent wrt "zh-Latn" as a prefix for "pinyin".

> > 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,
> Examples involving the language subtag are not really cogent, because
> every (regular) tag MUST have a language subtag.

Sure; but try on these: sl-rozaj is the prefix for biske, njiva, osojs and solba, though rozaj is redundant.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list