Re: Language tags (Re: Statistics on reusing request)

Glenn Adams <glenn@stonehand.com> wrote in message
<9511031019.AA02999@trubetzkoy.stonehand.com>:

> I'd like to improve 1766 to make it more comprehensive.  You couldn't
> help it that 639 is so limited.  So I'm really not faulting 1766.  It
> seems it is important to recognize its limitations based on 639's limits
> and move on from there.

The way to do that is to use the registration procedure for
language tags defined in RFC 1766. This RFC was never meant to
define a comprehensive set of langauge tags itself.

> If would be pleased to assist in improving 1766 so it can be a single,
> comprehensive language tag standard.  Something I also want.

The IANA language tag registry may become that comprehensive
standard. No revision of 1766 is needed to achieve that.

/Olle

--
Olle Jarnefors, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm <ojarnef@admin.kth.se>