Criteria for languages?
cowan at ccil.org
Tue Dec 1 21:35:30 CET 2009
Randy Presuhn scripsit:
> If one travels that path, "lvs" would be the better choice for tagging data
Of course it is. But is "lvs" the better choice for tagging Standard Latvian
> It's a bit like the 'cmn' / 'zh' situation.
It's exactly like that.
> I wonder whether treating Latgalian as a "marked form" (and making
> it a variant of Latvian) would make sense.
More information about the Ietf-languages