Add Likely Subtags first step
philip.newton at gmail.com
Sun Jan 25 20:52:17 CET 2015
On 25 January 2015 at 20:22, Reece Dunn <msclrhd at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 25 January 2015 at 18:58, Philip Newton <philip.newton at gmail.com> wrote:
> So how would you encode "English as spoken in Scotland"? Something
> like en-GB-x-scottish?
Something like that. There’s no registered subtag for that any more
than there is for ‘English as spoken in Wales’ or ‘English as spoken
Even better, though, would be ‘en-XS’, using a region subtag from the
range ‘XA–XZ’ reserved for private use, if sender and receive agree
beforehand that ‘XS’ will mean ‘Scotland’ for the purposes of their
communication; this subtag is unambiguously a region subtag, whereas
‘-x-scottish’ could be anything. See also section 4.6 ‘Considerations
for Private Use Subtags’ in RFC 5646.
(If you did want to use a private-use subtag, then ‘en-x-scotland’ or
‘en-x-scottish’ might be better, using it as a private region subtag,
rather than as a private variant subtag as in your example
>> Similarly with ‘de-(de-)1996’, which cannot mean ‘German as spoken in
>> 1996, or as written in that year in any orthography’, because that is
>> not what the variant subtag was registered as meaning. And
>> ‘uz-baku1926’ cannot mean ‘Uzbek as spoken in Baku in 1926’, nor can
>> ‘ja-Latn-hepburn’ mean ‘variety of Japanese written in the Latin
>> alphabet in Hepburn, Iowa’.
> What about en-US (American English dialect), en-GB (British English
> dialect), en-IE (Irish English accent) and others?
Here, ‘US, GB, IE’ are region subtags, not variant subtags, so you’re
comparing apples and oranges.
> I would imagine a better example would be the variety of English
> spoken in Oxfordshire.
That would also seem more likely to me than the speech of just one city.
More information about the Ietf-languages