Linguistically it is the same language. There is no reason why it needs to be a different code. The standard allows for a code that is different. The code en-simple is not in conformance with the standard.

Indeed, that's a problem! Imho, we'll have to deal with the status of Simple English in general. Any chance of successfully applying an ISO code for it? Otherwise, we'll run into more problems like this one <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikinews_Simple_English> [1] with new project applications (for example, see Jon Harald's reply under "arguments in favour"). While Wikipedia <https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_English> [2] defines Basic English (on which Simple English is based) as constructed language in its own right, that definition doesn't seem to have been accepted widely. If push comes to shove, I'd vote for en-simple. I had actually assumed that that was its encoding used already (based on the URL *simple*. wikipedia.org). Fwiw, Oliver [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikinews_Simple_… [2] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_English On 25-Aug-15 7:35 PM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: Hi, A question for the respected language code experts in the audience. Apparently, the Simple English Wikipedia uses "en" as its language code in the HTML lang attribute, etc. I never noticed it until recently, when it started causing various bugs with the ContentTranslation extension of which I am a developer. I somehow assumed that it uses something like "en-simple" without ever checking it, and that assumption was wrong - it's just "en". I believe that the code should be different from what is used by the English Wikipedia, like it is with other wikis in language variants, such as be-tarask. Do you have any suggestions about what code should it be? en-simple? en-x-simple? Something else? Should I register anything new with any standards organization? (If I recall correctly, this was done for be-tarask?) Can I reuse any existing code that would be appropriate? Is it a bad idea in general and it should be just "en"? Thanks! (PS: If you're curious what are the issues, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T110190 ) -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com ‪“We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬ _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom

I wasn't talking about a new code, just a subtag. The question is which one, and whether it should be registered or should we just make up something and use it. בתאריך 28 באוג׳ 2015 07:57,‏ "Jan van Steenbergen" &lt;ijzeren.jan(a)gmail.com&gt; כתב: _______________________________________________ Langcom mailing list Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom