Date: 2004-12-12 15:33
From: "Peter Constable" <petercon(_at_)microsoft(_dot_)com>
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, ietf-languages(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no
From: ietf-languages-bounces(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no
[mailto:ietf-languages-
bounces(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no] On Behalf Of Bruce Lilly
The point is that under RFC 3066,
the bilingual ISO language and country code lists are
considered definitive.
That is nowhere stated or even suggested in RFC 3066.
RFC 3066 section 2.2 states, in part:
- All 2-letter subtags are interpreted according to assignments found
in ISO standard 639, "Code for the representation of names of
languages" [ISO 639], or assignments subsequently made by the ISO
639 part 1 maintenance agency or governing standardization bodies.
and has a similar statement regarding ISO 3166.
"interpreted according to assignments found in" certainly
sounds as if the ISO lists are considered definitive for
their respective categories of subtags, since their
interpretation is specified as that given in those lists.
I don't see how the RFC 3066 text can be interpreted
otherwise.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf