Legacy implementations (was: RE: Serbo-Croatian continuum: the top level)
petercon at microsoft.com
Mon Mar 3 19:51:25 CET 2014
I agree: something limited to "xx" or "xx-XX" was broken wrt the RFC 3066 version of BCP 47, and frankly were even broken by what was permitted and exercised (with tags like "i-navajo") under RFC 1766. I would not let those implementations constrain decisions we might make.
From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell
Sent: March 3, 2014 10:23 AM
To: Gordon P. Hemsley; ietf-languages
Subject: Legacy implementations (was: RE: Serbo-Croatian continuum: the top level)
"Gordon P. Hemsley" <me at gphemsley dot org> wrote:
> The reality is, many implementations have not been updated past 'xx'
> and 'xx-XX'. And, sympathetic or not, you can't ignore reality.
> Introducing a primary language tag of 5 to 8 characters, regardless of
> whether you're strictly "allowed" to, would be extremely disruptive to
> a lot of extant legacy implementations. Extreme caution should be used
> in taking that approach; it is not a decision that should be made
Any implementation that claims to support language tagging, but can't handle anything past "xx" and "xx-XX", is in deep trouble indeed.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA
http://ewellic.org | @DougEwell
Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
More information about the Ietf-languages