- From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 01:17:29 -0400
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>, www-international@w3.org
Leif Halvard Silli scripsit: > In theory, that's the matter. But the matter in this particular case, is > that - apparently - some libraries maps thing as both Nynorsk, Bokmål > and Norwegian. More likely some libraries use only 'no' -- the original state of affairs -- because they cannot or do not want to distinguish between nb and nn. Other libraries want to make the distinction, so 639-1 provided separate tags for their use. However, they did not and would not deprecate 'no'. > Just so it is noted: If a Norwegian user finds a book that is tagged as > "Norwegian", then the user can only guess what it means. No Norwegian > user will think that such a book has to be Bokmål, for instance. Understood. But isn't it more *likely* to be so, just because there are more Bokmål books overall? > And if that was the case: Why not allow two language tags for Norwegian > documents as well? There is no problem in principle with assigning a document more than one tag -- it's just that nobody does it. -- Well, I have news for our current leaders John Cowan and the leaders of tomorrow: the Bill of cowan@ccil.org Rights is not a frivolous luxury, in force http://www.ccil.org/~cowan only during times of peace and prosperity. We don't just push it to the side when the going gets tough. --Molly Ivins
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 05:18:11 UTC