Subject: [Ltru] FX is deprecated

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:23:07 -0800

Draft-4646bis-09 specifies that the ISO 3166-1 exceptionally reserved 
("ER") code elements are to be added to the Language Subtag Registry, 
except for UK, because it is an exact synonym for GB.

The remaining ER code elements are AC, CP, DG, EA, EU, FX, IC, and TA. 
Of these, only FX was previously a formally assigned code element (for 
"Metropolitan France," then as now).  The others were never assigned, 
but were reserved at the request of another organization.  FX was 
assigned in 1993 and withdrawn in 1997, after the publication of RFC 
1766; because of this, it was added to the initial LSR but deprecated, 
with a Preferred-Value of FR.

According to Section 3.4, item 1 (in both RFC 4646 and 
draft-4646bis-09), "Values in the fields 'Type', 'Subtag', 'Tag', 
'Added', 'Deprecated' and 'Preferred-Value' MUST NOT be changed and are 
guaranteed to be stable over time."  This means a deprecated subtag like 
FX cannot be un-deprecated.

Because of this, FX will be unchanged by the new provision in 4646bis 
and will remain deprecated, while the other seven ER code elements will 
become new, non-deprecated subtags.  Is everyone comfortable with this?

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://home.roadrunner.com/~dewell
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 22:44:37 +0100

On Sat, Dec 01, 2007 at 01:23:07PM -0800,
 Doug Ewell <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 34 lines which said:

> Because of this, FX will be unchanged by the new provision in
> 4646bis and will remain deprecated, while the other seven ER code
> elements will become new, non-deprecated subtags.  Is everyone
> comfortable with this?

FX is completely unknown in France so nobody will regret it. It could
be argued that "metropolitan France" means something for the language
and that fr-FX could be sensible but I'm certain noone will never
think of it when tagging.

Most people in France use "France" as a synonym for "metropolitan
France", for instance in weather reports, when saying "it will rain
tomorrow everywhere in France", the speaker never bothers to check if
the sun will shine over Polynesia or West Indies.

> This means a deprecated subtag like FX cannot be un-deprecated.

So, even if ISO 3166 resurrects it, we won't?

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:53:00 -0800

> think of it when tagging.

But it's inconsistent.  That's what I'm looking at.

> So, even if ISO 3166 resurrects it, we won't?

That's what 4646 and 4646bis say.

---

From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 23:46:46 +0100

Doug Ewell wrote:

> Is everyone comfortable with this?

Sure, but it won't surprise you that I'm not going to
download and check drafts with "fantasy island" codes.

FX means one of eight down.  UK still missing as the
"minimal" subset that must be allowed if anything is,
it's the only plausible code (I could do without it).

> That's what 4646 and 4646bis say.

Then they're broken by design and need to be fixed.

 Frank

---

From: Peter Constable <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 15:28:33 -0800

> From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[email-masked]]

> become new, non-deprecated subtags.  Is everyone comfortable with this?

Sounds OK to me.

Peter