Add Likely Subtags first step
doug at ewellic.org
Sun Jan 25 02:25:09 CET 2015
Mark Davis ☕️ wrote:
> I would be very much in favor of deprecating all of the grandfathered
> codes, and if supplying preferred values.
I was sure we had had this discussion at least once before.
> BCP47 says the following. Unfortunately, we used the "extended
> language range" instead of a language priority list, which would have
> made it easy. So that means we have to list the alternatives in a
> comment instead of having them be machine readable:
It has been this way from the beginning of RFC 4646, and doesn't appear
to have caused major difficulty. In any case, this point affects ISO
639-based deprecations at least as much as deprecations of grandfathered
tags, so I don't see why it's particularly relevant here.
> Of these grandfathered codes, then, the following have not been
> deprecated. I suggest that we deprecate each of them, and supply
> alternatives where possible (in the description, and for zh-min)...
I am fine with Kent's suggestion: deprecate, and add a comment listing
subtags for four specific Gaulish languages (though it should list just
the subtags, not the descriptions for those subtags, like every other
time we have done this).
If Michael is fine with 'oxford', I won't argue. I thought it was a
conscious decision that 'oxford' might misleadingly imply the city
rather than the dictionary.
As Addison pointed out, like others before him, "i-default" is NOT
Undetermined. If we must break RFC 2277, we should assign a language
subtag of 'default' instead of distorting the meaning of 'und'.
This should be language subtag 'enochian'.
I am fine with Kent's suggestion of a variant under 'see'.
I am also fine Kent's suggestion to add a comment to "zh-min" showing
the subtags (no descriptions) of individual Min languages.
Note carefully that I am proposing 5- to 8-letter registered language
subtags in this message. I am not impressed by arguments that RFC
3066-era parsers can't handle them.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org
More information about the Ietf-languages