Anomaly in upcoming registry

CE Whitehead cewcathar at
Thu Jul 9 00:30:28 CEST 2009

Hi, I'm sorry; I read these threads in a rush and thought I'd noted enough to write back.  Also I skimmed through draft 10 of 4645 


and I thought for sure [hbs] was there but I looked again and did not see it.


I don't right now have an opinion as to what to do with text that is meant to target speakers of two or more of the individual languages (Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian)--that is I cannot decide whether it is best to let this text be tagged with the deprecated [sh] subtag or with a 'revived' [sh] subtag; I suppose that [hbs] then will never be an option; my goof).





C. E. Whitehead

cewcathar at 


 Doug Ewell doug at 
> CE Whitehead <cewcathar at hotmail dot com> wrote:

>> in this case I actually don't object to 'un-deprecating' the code 
>> element [sh] except that since we do have a three-letter code element 
>> for the same macrolanguage, and since we do have both two-letter and 
>> three-letter macrolanguage codes, it's almost unecessary labor to 
>> 'un-deprecate' it.

> Well, when you do find 'hbs' in the Registry or in the drafts, be sure 
> to let us know. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list