Hoi, WiktionaryZ does not follow RFC 3066 because it is unusable for its purposes. The RFC 3066 is unusable for the languages that are not addressed by it. To link into the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation we can include the code used by the Wikimedia Foundation.
The practice of using codes that are made up and that are not distinguishable from ISO-639 codes is against the terms of use. The codes qaa to qtz are the codes where you are free to do what you want to do. Thanks, GerardM
Brion Vibber wrote:
Minh Nguyen wrote:
Gerard, please note that Wikipedia hasn't standardized on ISO 639-2 like Wiktionary has. Otherwise, you'd be using "eng.wikipedia.org" instead of "en.wikipedia.org".
With rare exceptions, we follow RFC 3066 for language codes; this is the standard used on the web for the Content-Language HTTP header, HTML 'lang' attribute, etc.
This uses, roughly, in priority order:
- 2-letter ISO 639-1 code
- 3-letter ISO 639-2 code
- One of the specially registered 'i-*' codes
- Non-standard 'x-*' codes
ISO 639-3 codes will most likely end up in there sooner or later.
Where no standard codes are available, we've sometimes ended up using something else; in this case we *should* be using the ISO 639-3 3-letter code. If there are exceptions that are definitely wrong, we probably want to fix that.
Maybe someday; I still remember going to "en2.wikipedia.org" way back when, so the URLs certainly aren't permanent.
That was crude load-balancing before we had something better set up. :) It's redirected if you've got really old URLs from that period.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)