W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > July to September 2016

Re: Simplified or traditional for each Chinese macrolanguage

From: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 03:21:27 -0400
Message-ID: <CADJvFOVrzFhyzJfwmPGosP2Fe5W0XPCf2taDe=QUXY+AW5ziWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>
Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>, 董福興 <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, Makoto Kato <m_kato@ga2.so-net.ne.jp>, 劉慶 <ryukeikun@gmail.com>
2016-07-27 2:53 GMT-04:00 Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>:
> Errr... zh-min-nan is not a valid language tag at all... Not sure why we
> have that. Let me try to remove it :) And x-western is a Gecko-internal tag
> for general western languages.

Well, zh-min-nan certainly is (or at least was) a valid tag, since it
has been IANA registered. So is zh-guoyu. If this thread hadn't
somehow caught my attention, I would still be writing zh-guoyu a year
from now (as I've always done) when I needed to make the distinction
and I'd never even think of writing it as "zh-cmn".

As to why people don't tag these sublanguages more, isn't this a
chicken-and-egg problem? Since tagging doesn't seem to (in most cases)
produce any visible effects, why would anyone tag anything other than
at the document level unless you are a language enthusiaste?
-- 
Ambrose Li // http://o.gniw.ca / http://gniw.ca
If you saw this on CE-L: You do not need my permission to quote
me, only proper attribution. Always cite your sources, even if
you have to anonymize and/or cite it as "personal communication".
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2016 07:22:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 26 October 2016 23:39:18 UTC