Re: Tags and future new technologies (from RE: Flag tags (was: Re: Unicode 6.2 to Support the Turkish Lira Sign))

From: Philippe Verdy <>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 01:52:21 +0200

The principales used in ISO 3166, and those used for the extension of
language tags (with its locale extension subtags) could work as well.

If the first need is to represent current country flags simply
(ignoring the dated versions), and the first level of subdivisions in
those countries, then ISO 3166 already provides the basic codes (we
just need the convention that any codes that consists in two letters,
or start by two letters, and hyphen must obey to ISO 3166-1 or ISO
3166-2. Further extensions will wait the development of a more
complete registry, which will allow defining codes using other
prefixes acting like namespaces.

ISO 3166 also realsy has codes for private use, notably any code
starting by "X", so that the registry can preserve the use of the
prefix "X-", while keeping for itself some other prefix staring by "X
and another letter.

These mechanisms are not really new and easy to understand as they
work in other standards. We don't need to reinvent the wheel.

2012/6/2 Doug Ewell <>:
> Philippe Verdy wrote:
>> No, my poposal gives something that is immediately usable, and does
>> not create any ambiguity. It is simple to implement even without the
>> presence of a technical ligaturing solution. Those flags will be
>> immediately usable, without any of the political complications created
>> by the case of flags. It will avoid prolieferations of proposals, and
>> infinite debates for encoding or not some flags, or for changing the
>> representative glyphs.
> Again, not saying Unicode should do this, but:
> Doesn't there at least have to be a well-defined convention for
> representing flags before any of this works? How do I represent:
> 1. the flag of the United States
> 2. the flag of the state of Colorado
> 3. the flag of Adams County, Colorado
> 4. the flag of the city of Thornton
> Not all of these might be defined right away, but an extensible
> structure within which to define them would have to be in place.
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
> | @DougEwell
Received on Fri Jun 01 2012 - 18:54:01 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jun 01 2012 - 18:54:01 CDT