[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Ltru] Re: [psg.com #1033] Written Spoken Signed



> From: ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces at lists.ietf.org]
On
> Behalf Of Doug Ewell


> In fact, I think this should be one of the first variant subtags
> requested.  It opens the door for sensible tagging of the 16 signed
> spoken languages listed on Michael Everson's page, and possibly
others.

What page? (I can't find anything on signed languages at evertype.com.)



> What I don't understand about this whole discussion is why anyone
would
> want to use a script subtag -- 'Zxxx' or anything else -- for spoken
> content in the first place.  It's not like script subtags are ever
> required.

No, they're not; but if someone wanted a way to explicitly indicate that
some content was (say) verbal -- unwritten -- English, they could use
"en-Zxxx" in contrast to "en". Just like someone *could* use "en-Latn"
to explicitly distinguish English in Latin orthography from something
else. I don't think there'd be any great need for it, but someone could
do it if it met a need.


Peter Constable

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru




Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.