From: Doug Ewell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Sep 12 2006 - 01:13:15 CDT
ISO 639-3 will have a number of "macrolanguages," which are broad
linguistic concepts like "Chinese" that have more refined linguistic
concepts like "Wu" or "Hakka" or "Mandarin" underneath them.
Please read the deeper explanation of this at the official ISO 639-3 Web
site, and then read RFC 4646 again, and come back when you are more
familiar with the underlying concepts.
-- Doug Ewell Fullerton, California, USA http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ RFC 4645 * UTN #14 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philippe Verdy" <email@example.com> To: "Doug Ewell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "Unicode Mailing List" <email@example.com>; "UnicoRe Mailing List" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:41 Subject: Re: New RFC 4645-4647 (language tags) > From: "Doug Ewell" <email@example.com> >> Dialectical differences like the ones you are thinking of will be >> handled by "extended language" (not "extension") subtags in the ISO >> 639-3-aware replacement for RFC 4646, currently under development. > > Ok, but when I look at the current draft list of ISO 639-3 language > codes, most of them do not qualify as extended languages, to be > encoded after a primary language, and would finally go to ISO 639-2; > and there are codes for language families/groups/collections that > would fit in ISO-639-2 and that could be further qualified by an > extended language, but this won't work for many languages in existing > ISO 639-2. > > So I am wondering if ISO 639-3 will really contain a list of codes, > and if, in fine, it would be better to have most of the new codes > integrated into -2, just for the coherence (-3 includes all the codes > of -2). > > If ISO 649-3 is published like it is now, there will be no better > choice than updating RFC 4646 to accept also ISO 649-3 codes as valid > primary language subtags, or most of these codes will have to be > registered separately in the IANA registry (not redundant then). > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 12 2006 - 01:33:42 CDT