Randy Presuhn randy_presuhn at
Thu May 1 17:45:40 CEST 2008

Hi -

> From: "Doug Ewell" <doug at>
> To: <ietf-languages at>
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:05 AM
> Randy Presuhn <randy underscore presuhn at mindspring dot com> wrote:
> > However, do keep in mind RFC 4646 section 2:
> >
> >   Language tags are used to help identify languages, whether spoken,
> >   written, signed, or otherwise signaled, for the purpose of
> >   communication.  This includes constructed and artificial languages,
> >   but excludes languages not intended primarily for human
> >   communication, such as programming languages.
> I am keeping that in mind, but unfortunately I am also looking at 
> draft-4646bis, Section 4.1 (4)(4), which -- despite the "out of scope" 
> statement above -- goes on to recommend the use of 'zxx' for 
> "programming source code."

If that text is being mis-read as a recommendation, we need to change it.
To me the text in question is clearly just a list of possible examples,
with no normative force.  After its sole normative sentence, the paragraph
continues with "Some examples might include".

But to the point of this thread, the 4.1 (4) begins:
   4.  [ISO639-2] has defined several codes included in the subtag
       registry that require additional care when choosing language
       tags.  In most of these cases, where omitting the language tag is
       permitted, such omission is preferable to using these codes.
       Language tags SHOULD NOT incorporate these subtags as a prefix,
       unless the additional information conveys some value to the

That *is* a recommendation.  If anyone thinks this text needs to be
changed (either to make it stronger or weaker in normative force)
please follow up on ltru at, rather than this mailing list,
and do so ASAP.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list