RE: ISO 639-3 language codes posted
"Doug Ewell" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20170206223432.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.a4f218e53b.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> |
John Cowan wrote: > The new languages were rejected are pretty uniformly because they are > dialects, not languages. I move that the Official Doug be asked to > grab these people's emails and send them a letter explaining what a > variant tag is, and suggesting that they (severally) apply for them. Getting users out of the mid-'90s, RFC 1766 mindset is a work in progress. As evidenced by a recent CLDR ticket on pseudolocales, some folks still think that "IETF language tags use language codes defined by ISO 639-1/2 and region codes defined by ISO 3166" and believe there are still "many existing systems that support only two-letter language codes." I can try. It's worth the effort. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org _______________________________________________ Ietf-languages mailing list [email protected] http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages