Addison Doug Ewell wrote:
Addison Phillips <addison at yahoo dash inc dot com> wrote:It's a coincidence, but one that is desirable. In other words, I think it would be a Bad Thing to deprecate some value in favor of a grandfathered tag in the post-RFC 4646 era.Of course it would. Nobody's proposing to do this in the future. We are talking about the situation with "zh-hakka", which became the Preferred-Value for "i-hak" (except we didn't call it that) back in the RFC 1766 era. It's not going to be partitioned into language + variant (unlike "en-boont") because we know the language is covered by ISO 639-3. This situation could not happen again.In fact, the rules explicitly allow a Preferred-Value to be a tag, if the thing being deprecated is a grandfathered item. In 4646bis, for example, it says:...# For fields of type 'grandfathered' and 'redundant', a canonical mapping to a complete language tag.I did cite that. We know the P-V for deprecated tag "A" must be another tag -- the question is whether tag "B" can be a grandfathered tag. And the answer is, of course it can, as long as tag "B" replaced tag "A" before the RFC 4646 era. That is exactly what happened with "zh-hakka".-- Doug Ewell Fullerton, California, USA http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ RFC 4645 * UTN #14
-- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at 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.