Re: RFC2616 erratum "languagetag"

On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 06:23:44PM +0100,
 Julian Reschke <> wrote 
 a message of 87 lines which said:

> > > a nice feature of rfc2616, the fact that the syntax is contained
> > > in the spec, with no need to get something else.

Is there a general rule somewhere against cross-RFC references?
Because a lot of RFC do it (even RFC 2616, as you mention).

> 3.10.  Language Tags
>        Example tags include:
>        en, en-US, en-cockney, i-cherokee, x-pig-latin

As mentioned by Frank Ellermann, it is bad practice to include invalid
(even if they are well-formed) tags like en-cockney.

i-cherokee is worse since it is not even well-formed (I agree it is
not clear in RFC 4646 but much better said in 4646bis).

x-pig-latin is not valid but it is a private tag, so I find it OK.

>    where any two-letter primary-tag is an ISO-639 language
>    abbreviation and any two-letter initial subtag is an ISO-3166
>    country code.

No, this is no longer true since RFC 4646 and the introduction of the
IANA registry. For instance, "yu" as a country is no longer in ISO
3166 but still in the registry.

Received on Monday, 26 November 2007 10:57:22 UTC