Review period; Nepali and Oriya
cowan at mercury.ccil.org
Fri Aug 24 01:36:10 CEST 2012
Mark Davis ☕ scripsit:
> For stability, it would be better to interpret each code when defined as
> the predominant form (eg Arabic = MSA), and then add additional language
> codes for mutually-incomprensible forms whenever they can be clearly
The only way to know if that promotes stability is to know what's been done.
If we know that "ar" has been used only for MSA in the past, then it's
stabilization to to interpret it so now. If we know the opposite, then
it's stabilization to interpret it more widely now. If we don't know,
we have to guess.
> Simply the fact that some Swiss German data in 2000 was tagged as 'de'
> shouldn't be taken as evidence that 'de' encompasses it; it was probably
> just the 'best available choice'.
I can't tell if this data is actual (and if so, what is it?) or hypothetical.
But that, he realized, was a foolish John Cowan
thought; as no one knew better than he cowan at ccil.org
that the Wall had no other side. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--Arthur C. Clarke, "The Wall of Darkness"
More information about the Ietf-languages