suppress-script values for fil, mi, pes, prs, qu members
petercon at microsoft.com
Wed Oct 20 17:24:59 CEST 2010
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
> Currently we have 7844 language subtags, 134 of which have S-S. Adding
> 48 more (a 35% increase) does not pose any architectural problems, but
> could send us down a perfectionist rabbit hole where each and every
> language is subject to the S-S debate.
That's not at all what I'm seeking. These are cases that I think are clear, and cases also in which I have found usage of tags without script subtags where the lack of script information is presenting some interop issues. If s-s fields aren't added, we'll have implementations that carry private data; but that may still leave interop issues with other implementations that don't carry the same data. Putting s-s fields into these records makes that less likely.
> Ethnologue says that speakers of Bozaba ('bzo', population 5500) in the
> DRC "also use Lingala mainly in the market." Since Lingala has an S-S of
> 'Latn', does it follow that Bozaba should as well?
You're chasing the fallacy of the excluded middle: you seem to be suggesting that are options are binary: status quo, or that we have to engage in a debate over Bozaba and thousands of other languages. I am not suggesting any changes related to Bozaba at this time.
More information about the Ietf-languages