David Starner prosfilaes at
Wed Sep 24 21:50:55 CEST 2008

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison at> wrote:
> The guiding principle in forming language tags is to "tag content wisely." Wisdom, of course takes different forms, but 'km', 'es', and 'pqm' are almost certainly better tag choices than ones that include dubious region subtags if one is not familiar enough to know if a regional distinction applies (or not).

es-US is going to be very distinct from es-SP, and it's likely to
matter for the listeners. The distinction between ar-SA versus ar-MA
is also likely to matter for listeners. If one is not familiar enough
to know whether a regional distinction applies, and one knows that the
users are going to be unhappy if it's not made in places where it
needs to be, I think it should be made.

As for the ongoing discussion, there is data tagged zh-TW, and when
that data is romanized into Hanyu Pinyin, it will be very natural to
tag it zh-TW-pinyin, and I see it hard to argue that's formally wrong.
So zh-TW(-Latn)-pinyin can't be trusted to be Tongyong Pinyin.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list