philip.newton at gmail.com
Fri Aug 6 10:03:12 CEST 2010
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 04:13, Mark Davis ☕ <mark at macchiato.com> wrote:
> There is no need to mark it as "(post 1500)", since there is no competing
> "Occitan". The (post 1500) really belongs in a comment, or as an alternate
> Description. After all, we don't mark "en" as "English (post 1500) even
> though we have:
> Type: language
> Subtag: enm
> Description: Middle English (1100-1500)
> Added: 2005-10-16
True, but we do mark "el" as "Modern Greek (1453-)".
I think this is merely an artefact of using the descriptions in ISO
639-2, which include dates in certain cases (such as Modern Greek and
(modern) Occitan) but not in others (such as (modern) English and
Personally, I'd keep those items from ISO 639-2 identical with what
that list has. (But shouldn't oc then be "Occitan, Provençal (1500-)"
or possibly "Occitan (1500-)" + "Provençal (1500-)"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ISO_639-2_codes#O implies that
both names are in ISO 639-2.)
Philip Newton <philip.newton at gmail.com>
More information about the Ietf-languages