Criteria for languages?
cowan at ccil.org
Wed Dec 2 20:43:34 CET 2009
Peter Constable scripsit:
> I recalled there being a short list, but after several minutes
> of browsing around the doc searching on "extended language" and
> "macrolanguage" and not finding it, I was left with the impression I
> mentioned earlier.
It's implicit in the Registry.
> I don't see how the text you cited eliminates an option of having
> and extlang entry for "lvs"; it seems only to prohibit having an
> extlang entry for "lvs" if there were not also an extlang entry for
> "ltg". The option of having extlang entries for both "lvs" and "ltg"
> does not appear to be either prohibited or discouraged by that text.
Is Mr. Haddock in the room?
We have our first problem of constitutional interpretation under our
fourth Constitution. (We are not the Fourth Republic, because we are a
monarchy, and a monarchy under a single dynasty -- nay, a single monarch.)
> 2. 'Extlang' records SHOULD NOT be created for languages if
> other languages encompassed by the macrolanguage do not
> also include 'extlang' records.
I interpret the main clause in this sentence as applying if there are as yet
no other co-encompassed languages; you and Addison interpret it as
not applying in that case. Consulting my local Talmudist produced a
John Cowan cowan at ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan
Original line from The Warrior's Apprentice by Lois McMaster Bujold:
"Only on Barrayar would pulling a loaded needler start a stampede toward one."
English-to-Russian-to-English mangling thereof: "Only on Barrayar you risk to
lose support instead of finding it when you threat with the charged weapon."
More information about the Ietf-languages