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

Re: Simplified or traditional for each Chinese macrolanguage

From: Xidorn Quan <me@upsuper.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 17:26:18 +1000
Message-Id: <1469604378.4094917.677970609.58CA7667@webmail.messagingengine.com>
To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
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>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016, at 05:21 PM, Ambrose LI wrote:
> 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".

Oh, okay, then I guess we probably should add
> zh-min-nan=zh-TW
> zh-guoyu=zh-TW
to the list as well. Although guoyu is basically cmn, we don't usually
call it Guo Yu in mainland China, I believe.

- Xidorn
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2016 07:26:42 UTC

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