everson at evertype.com
Thu Sep 12 19:11:28 CEST 2013
On 12 Sep 2013, at 17:38, "Phillips, Addison" <addison at lab126.com> wrote:
> That’s correct: the ‘fonuni’ subtag, if approved, could be used to validly form any language tag, including both fewer (en-unifon) and more (en-Latn-NZ-unifon) subtags that matched the Prefix field(s) in the registry, as well as other well-formed (but non-sensical) tags (tlh-Cyrl-AQ-unifon).
> Any reason why ‘fonuni’ would be the subtag you proposed instead of ‘unifon’?
Well, just because we have other phonetic subtags: fonipa, fonupa, fonxsamp
I guess there'd be no particular reason to insist on fonuni rather than unifon.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
More information about the Ietf-languages