Missing subtags 003 and 172

Phillips, Addison addison at lab126.com
Fri Jul 30 18:30:32 CEST 2010

> On 30 Jul 2010, at 16:08, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
> > Do you really think we should drag everyone through the pain of
> doing another RFC just to fix these two codes?
> If those are the rules, those are the rules. In which case this is
> a matter for the other list.

I don't believe that those are necessarily the rules. An oversight can be corrected. The 003 (North America) code appears to me to be an oversight arising from the fact that it appears in an odd place in the M.49 code list (but is clearly indicated to be a "continent" there). I think that such a code, since it is not explicitly forbidden and fits the intended set for inclusion, can and should be registered via the normal request process.

The CIS code appears to be forbidden. It isn't a country or a (natural feature) geographic region. It appears in the economic groupings and, thus, is forbidden by rule. I'm not sure what value the code has in CLDR identifiers, but assuming the use case for the moment, I would suggest that a private use code or (unlikely to succeed??) variant registration are the workarounds.


Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect (Lab126)
Chair (W3C I18N, IETF IRI WGs)

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list