proposed ISO 639 change for "arn"

Mark Davis ☕ mark at
Tue Dec 11 02:20:09 CET 2012

BTW, as far as we, and many others are concerned, making it a macrolanguage
doesn't accomplish anything.

Unicode CLDR has a policy always retains the macrolanguage code, using it
instead of the predominent encompassed form. This is also true of many if
not most companies and organizations that use Unicode CLDR, as well as
others. For example, we use and will continue to use "zh" instead of "cmn".
This was to avoid the massive costs and compatibility problems that
switching forms would have caused.

So if "arn" were a macrolanguage, it wouldn't make any difference for many
if not most implementations. They would continue to use arn.

Mark <>
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Michael Everson <everson at>wrote:

> No, it is better to re-assign "arn" to the macrolanguage and give the user
> community something they will actually use.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list