Doug Ewell doug at
Tue Sep 9 03:42:04 CEST 2008

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

>> I trust that this compromise will prove satisfactory.
> Actually this again shows that the possibility of
> "generic variants" are a bug in RFC 4646.
> What is really needed is an extension registry for
> this zoo (fonipa, fonupa, pinyin, ...), but as long
> as nobody creates it, and as long as this ugly hole
> in RFC 4646 permits such "generic variant" kludges,
> go for it.

The question of whether to assign "zh" or "zh-Latn" as the Prefix for 
'pinyin' has NOTHING to do with generic variants.  Where did that come 
from?  Nobody has seriously proposed making 'pinyin' a generic variant 
like 'fonipa'.  At most they have suggested that a small set of 
languages be added as multiple Prefix fields.

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

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list