Doug Ewell scripsit: > Neither ISO 3166-3 nor (perhaps more annoyingly) ISO 3166-2 codes are > allowed in RFC 3066 language tags. So at least in that context, there > is no possibility of confusing them with ISO 15924 script codes.
Actually, anything can be used in RFC 3066 if it's registered. We already have sgn-us-ma for Martha's Vineyard (Massachusetts) Sign Language, for instance: us-ma is an ISO 3166-2 tag. > And again, RFC 3066 language tags don't allow for the use of these ISO > 3166-2 region codes. I'm not quite sure why this is; I think it might > be useful on occasion to be able to encode: > > es-US-CA > es-US-FL > es-US-NY > > to identify the Mexican-, Cuban, and Puerto Rican-influenced dialects of > Spanish spoken in California, Florida, and Mexico respectively. This can be done if you register them explicitly. > The successor to RFC 3066 is already on its way. It will allow ISO > 3166-1 country subtags and ISO 15924 script subtags to coexist, and be > used in a generative way instead of by registering each combination > (still no ISO 3166-2, though). *If* it survives the IETF process, which is by no means certain. Harald isn't behind it, for one thing. -- John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan Heckler: "Go on, Al, tell 'em all you know. It won't take long." Al Smith: "I'll tell 'em all we *both* know. It won't take any longer."
