Language Variant subtags for Sanskrit
Mark Davis ☕
mark at macchiato.com
Tue Jul 13 19:40:49 CEST 2010
I fail to understand why people think that obfuscation is a good thing...
There will be a prefix for "classical" that completely disambiguates it.
— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 08:28, Phillips, Addison <addison at lab126.com> wrote:
> Most of the requests seem straightforward. Are we only talking about the
> subtag for "classical"? Using a native term to obfuscate "classical" would
> possibly be a good solution for that one subtag. There is no reason why a
> native term is required for the others.
> Addison Phillips
> Globalization Architect (Lab126)
> Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)
> Internationalization is not a feature.
> It is an architecture.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> > bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:13 AM
> > To: ietf-languages at iana.org
> > Cc: peter_scharf at brown.edu
> > Subject: Re: Language Variant subtags for Sanskrit
> > These requests for Sanskrit can't proceed until we have at least a
> > bit
> > of agreement on what the subtag values should be.
> > --
> > Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
> > RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages