Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian

John Cowan cowan at
Thu Dec 31 05:22:45 CET 2009

Doug Ewell scripsit:

> Which is exactly why it's a Good Thing to keep the ISO 639-5 collection 
> codes around.  Sometimes you know only that a given sample is in some 
> Uto-Aztecan language, not which one.  It's better to tag it imprecisely 
> as "azc" than incorrectly, or not at all.

On the other hand, if all you know is that the document is in an
indigenous language of California, you have no clue, because at least
seven indigenous language families (Hokan, Chumash, Uto-Aztecan, Na-Dene,
Penutian, Yukian, Algic) are or were spoken there, of which Hokan and
Penutian may or may not be legitimate groupings, and to make things worse,
Chumash, Penutian, and Yukian lack 639-5 code elements.  (To say nothing
of the Indo-European, Muskogean, Tarascan, and Austronesian languages
spoken there.)

John Cowan  cowan at
The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own
skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among
other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague.  --Edsger Dijkstra

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list