Re: Revised forms for Montenegrin (was: RE: Macrolanguage)

unlike Kent Karlsson wrote:

> If we are to have comments like:
>
> Comments: see <every other language code under the same macrolanguage>
> for <every other language under the same macrolanguage>
>
> then we should do so systematically. We don't seem to have them for
> any other macrolanguage, so why for 'sh' (and then only partial such
> comments)?

There has never been an attempt to be 100% exhaustive or comprehensive
with Comments fields in any way.

I suggested this comment in

https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-languages/current/msg00083.html

because "Montenegrin" has always been identified with the Serbian ("sr")
tag, and now a new tag is being created which destabilizes this usage,
and I thought it would be helpful to steer users toward the new tag. I
can remove this if it is going to be objectionable.
 
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org