No consensus on en-GB-oed replacement?

Mark Davis ☕️ mark at
Wed Apr 1 11:30:29 CEST 2015

APIs and specifications for using language tags are needlessly complicated
by the handful of irregulars that cannot be recast in the canonical form.
If they were a large, important set, it might have been worth having
special syntax for, and making special allowances in all the mechanisms
that use them, but only a handful of non-deprecated irregulars were not
given alternate canonical forms with regular syntax.

If we can take care of that handful, then it allows them (their canonical
equivalents) to be used in a wider range of software. That's the point of
this entire exercise. We've managed to get consensus on all but:
i-default, i-mingo, en-GB-oed

And we appear to be close on en-GB-oed...


> Needless snarkiness doesn’t make this work more pleasant.

True. I disliked John's telling me what I meant by what I said—while being
wrong about it. I agree that being impolite or snarky doesn't progress the

Mark <>

*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Michael Everson <everson at>

> On 1 Apr 2015, at 08:15, Mark Davis ☕️ <mark at> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:34 PM, <cowan at> wrote:
> > By "us" you mean Google, and it is useless to you only because you have
> > arbitrarily decided not to support any irregular tags.
> >
> > ​No, I mean Unicode (CLDR). And our decision was not "arbitrary”.
> Splendid. Would you like to share with us the non-arbitrary, considered
> decisions not to support a tiny handful of irregular tags which existed? I
> mean, if you were supporting the BCP, they’d’ve just been there, so an
> explicit suggestion “Hey, let’s not support irregular tags” must’ve been
> mooted by somebody. By whom? Who seconded it? Was there a vote? I’m sure
> we’re all eager to learn about this.
> > Any more conclusions you want to jump to, as long as you are at it?
> Needless snarkiness doesn’t make this work more pleasant.
> Michael Everson *
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list