RE: prefer-language tag

• From: Jian Yang <jian@olf.gouv.qc.ca>
• Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 19:29:58 -0600
• To: "'John D. Burger'" <john@mitre.org>, Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU>
• Cc: Marc Blanchet <Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>, "ietf-languages@apps.ietf.org" <ietf-languages@apps.ietf.org>, "ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM" <ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM>
• Message-id: <01BD3E35.EEA6A790@RIOFIL>

-----Message d'origine-----
De:	John D. Burger [SMTP:john@mitre.org]
Date:	jeudi 19 février 1998 12:58
À:	Mark Crispin
Cc:	Marc Blanchet; ietf-languages@apps.ietf.org; ietf-charsets@INNOSOFT.COM
Objet:	Re: prefer-language tag

[John D. Burger]:  

[...]


   Applications should always treat language tags as a single token; the
   division into main tag and subtags is an administrative mechanism,
   not a navigation aid.

In particular, I suppose there are examples involving Chinese (e.g., ZH,
ZH-TW, and ZH-CN) where the proposed behaviour is problematic.

[Jian]

True if one links those tags to different charset (GB, GBK, BIG5, CNS, CCCII, etc.) used for Chinese; 
but false from the linguistic point of view.

Now, could somebody confirm me if tags like FR-que, FR, EN-us, EN... should be linked to different charsets? if yes, which charset respectively? if no, then the above statement about Chinese is false.

Best regards.

Jian YANG


--Boundary (ID uEbHHWxWEwCKT9wM3evJ5w)

Received on Tuesday, 24 February 1998 20:41:35 UTC