Re: Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags)

Julian Reschke wrote:

> Optimally, we'll just have to bump up the reference then, right?

Almost certainly, yes.  Just don't *copy* RFC 4646 syntax details.

> I'm tempted to drop the statement, or even go further to drop
> the example as well.

An updated example would be nice.  For readers not familar with
new 4646-features it could get them to read RFC 4646, figure out
what es-419 is, lookup man-Nkoo-GN, or simply see that az-Arab
is something that wasn't possible before.  Admittedly a case of
RFC-spamvertizing, not necessary to get HTTP technically right.

 Frank