- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:53:26 -0400
- To: Jonathan Pool <pool@utilika.org>
- Cc: www-international@w3.org
Jonathan Pool scripsit:
> Could somebody explain why BCP 47 mentions ISO 639-3 only twice
> as something that might someday become relevant, and the current
> discussants about Norwegian don't mention ISO 639-3?
The LTRU WG is really really close to finalizing the next version of
BCP 47, which will include the complete set of 639-3 code elements
(other than those already covered by 639-1).
> My impression has been that ISO 639-3 is being increasingly adopted
> for structured data as the usual basis for interoperable language
> reference and the persistence of ISO 639-1 codes in any standards
> that intend to be inclusive of the world's languages is a temporary
> inconvenience due to backward compatibility.
Due to backward compatibility, yes; inconvenient, possibly; temporary, no.
There is no intention to remove the rule that says 639-1 code elements
take precedence over -2 and -3 elements as BCP 47 language subtags.
The languages of 639-1 cover an awful lot of documents.
--
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
O beautiful for patriot's dream that sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam undimmed by human tears!
America! America! God mend thine every flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control, thy liberty in law!
-- one of the verses not usually taught in U.S. schools
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 13:54:07 UTC