Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com
Thu Nov 26 00:50:36 CET 2015
I appreciate the effort to differentiate from the simple term , and realized totally that odgen1933 is too long, however repeating the 1st 3 letters of the parent language tag doesn't help with that differentiation. I'd prefer a different code that people unaware of Odgen's Basic English couldn't possibly confuse with simplified English. Odgenbe. Obe1933. Whatever.
(Though again I think it deserves a primary language tag).
From: Ietf-languages [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
Sent: November 25, 2015 3:01 PM
To: ietflang IETF Languages Discussion <ietf-languages at iana.org>
Subject: Re: Pending requests
On 25 Nov 2015, at 20:11, Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com> wrote:
> And the confusion between "Basic" and "simple" is why I'd propose a tag of -odgen or -odgen1933 instead of a word that could be confused with an adjective.
This is why I haven’t proposed “basic” but “basiceng” and why I don’t support “simple” on its own.
ogden1933 is not valid due to its length.
More information about the Ietf-languages