Anomaly in upcoming registry

Roozbeh Pournader roozbeh at
Thu Jul 9 19:41:36 CEST 2009

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:58 -0700, Mark Davis ⌛ wrote:
> Had we had BCP 47 some time ago (and the right country boundaries),
> they would have been sh-RS (or maybe sh-Cyrl), sh-BA, sh-HR. Having
> "sh" as a macrolanguage recognizes that situation, and gives us a
> neutral general code to express the situation.

Well, "sr" is neither "sh-Cyrl" nor "sh-RS". It may be "sh-RS \union
sh-ME". What is known as "Serbian" language/dialect is written in both
Serbia and Montenegro, and in both Latin and Cyrillic. (My employer does
localization services to sr-Latn-ME, for example. But I personally do
not know if sr-ME is dominantly Latn or Cyrl.)


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list