doug at ewellic.org
Thu Sep 10 05:43:38 CEST 2009
John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:
> I think this is a good use case for a BCP 47 extension; translation
> source information is closely associated with BCP 47 language tags,
> such that it would make sense to pack them into a single string, yet
> distinct enough from the language/origin/variant model to not fit into
> it well.
Good points all.
> To be sure, the administrative barrier against adding a new extension
> is *much* higher than that against adding a new variant, although the
> required RFC will be much less complex than BCP 47.
I hereby offer to help with the RFC if anyone wants to do this, but I do
not volunteer to moderate any mailing lists.
> (This should silence Doug's whinging on the subject of extensions.)
I hereby promise to whinge less if this goes through.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
More information about the Ietf-languages