Phillips, Addison addison at
Wed Sep 3 20:58:13 CEST 2008

As I understand it, his is the deciding opinion. As has been stated many times, this list is not a voting booth.

In particular, Michael can decide to approve or not approve a given registration request. He (or others) may propose a modified request for his approval during the “two week discussion period”, but he can only approve or disapprove of the mooted request. He *may* decide it based on “rough consensus” (the usual IETF policy), but he *may* also reject it based on even a single compelling opinion (which may be his own opinion, so long as it is clearly expressed on the list). There is an appeals process for cases in which people feel that Michael has been capricious in approving or rejecting an item.

FWIW, I prefer having both ‘zh’ and ‘zh-Latn’ as prefix fields. I don’t see any objection to approving these items, just to the final record form.

I also note: if ‘zh’ is given as a prefix now, ‘zh-latn’ can be added later. The converse is *also* true.


Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

From: ietf-languages-bounces at [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 11:50 AM
To: Mark Davis; Tracey, Niall
Cc: ietf-languages at

Mark, Michael shouldn’t be making unilateral decisions; his is only one opinion. If the majority opinion is that “zh-Latn” is better, then that’s what he should approve.


From: mark.edward.davis at [mailto:mark.edward.davis at] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 9:52 AM
To: Tracey, Niall
Cc: Peter Constable; ietf-languages at

As I said, I have no objection at all to making the prefix be zh-Latn instead of just zh; I would prefer it. It is Michael Everson who wanted "zh" instead, so perhaps you should address him on this topic.

(For my part, I think it is more important to have the subtag registered -- and not have this drag out forever -- than for the subtag's Prefix to be perfect; in practice people will use Latn as a prefix anyway.)

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Tracey, Niall <niall.tracey at<mailto:niall.tracey at>> wrote:
We all know that new tags don't gain sudden acceptance overnight. It would be one thing if there was a suppress-script for subtags -- in that case systems could update themselves automatically. As it is, that script information is in the free-text fields and requires human intervention to insert into systems, so it's going to be a while coming. In legacy systems, it may never happen.

If we issue advice saying that the text should be tagged zh-Latn-wadegile, it will be rendered correctly by all properly-written software systems.

If we tell people that zh-wadegile is enough, more of them will tag text as such and systems will attempt to render it in Hanji.

Izh-Latn-wadegile is surely the only fault-tolerant (userproof?) option.
Shouldn't we build fault-tolerance in at every level?


From: ietf-languages-bounces at<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at>] On Behalf Of Mark Davis
Sent: 03 September 2008 16:35
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages at<mailto:ietf-languages at>


While I share that opinion, there were others that objected to it. And I can live with the required prefix being only zh; I think that reasonable implementations will also include Latn anyway.

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Peter Constable <petercon at<mailto:petercon at>> wrote:
From: ietf-languages-bounces at<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at> [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at<mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at>] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell

> Here are the proposed new records and registration forms, for a two-week
> review period.  (Sorry, guys: RFC 4646, Section 3.7.)  Eligible to be
> added Wednesday, September 9 at 3:00 UTC, unless someone objects or
> finds a problem.
> ===

> Prefix: zh

IMO this should be "zh-Latn".

More generally, it has always been my opinion that variant subtags denoting a particular written form should always be prefixed by a script subtag except when Suppress-Script applies.

Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at<mailto:Ietf-languages at>

This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list