[Foundation-l] Community draft of language proposal policy

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
The IETF has been involved in incorporating the ISO-639-3 for over a year
since the moment this version of the standard became official. The new
proposed RFC will be the RFC 4646-bis. Many languages that we recognise in
the Wikimedia Foundation are not recognised in the RFC 4646. It is exactly
because of this standard being behind the time that we use the ISO-639-3.
Thanks,
      Gerard

On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> >> And one more question, just to be sure: Internet standards (like
> >> HTML/XML language tags or so) are using RFC 4646 codes, not ISO 639?
> >
> > Yes. HTML 4.01 references RFC 1766 (the 1995 version) and XML 1.0
> > references RFC 3066 (the 2001 version). A W3C article on the subject [1]
> > states that the most recent RFC in the BCP 47 series is the preferred
> > standard for XML and HTML documents, currently RFC 4646.
> >
> > [1] <http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/>
>
> Then, I see no reason why to stay with ISO 639 codes. RFC 4646 codes
> are more flexible (=better) and Internet standards are based on those
> codes.
>
> The only issue which I see is: Do we have some problems with language
> codes which mean one language in ISO 639 and a different one in RFC
> 4646?
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>