Subject: [Ltru] Re: Description on tags, not just subtags?

From: Nicolas Krebs <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:24:35 +0100

>To: [email-masked]
>From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>

>Nicholas Shanks wrote:
>
>> I'll wager that those using de-FR, als and so on are not even
>> looking at the registry, and probably don't know it exists.
>
>"de-FR" and "als" are rather different, the latter is just wrong.
>
>The former was a sound workaround for Alsatian before the new 
>"gsw" was introduced (2006), and until everybody learns that it
>exists, and that it's supposed to encompass Alsatian.  
>
>"de-FR" is still a good workaround for any German language used
>in France if the tagger has no clue which of these languages it
>is - Alsatian isn't the only game in twown ;-)  

A little remark: 
Currently ( see http://www.langtag.net/registries/lsr-language-utf8.txt ), 
"de" is for German language only, not for all German languages or 
all Germanic languages, in the same way that "fr" do not inclue "wa" (Walloon) or "pcd", and "en" do note include sco (Scots). 

If if "gem" where for all Germanic languages (see
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg09258.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg09260.html ), 
and without other subtag, 
gem-fr would be the best tag for all germanic idioms of/in France. 

><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franconian_languages> contains
>some examples, in this or another article I found that the 
>German language spoken in Strasbourg is neither "Franconian"
>nor "Alemanic" but a variant of "High German".  Stéphane picked
>an interesting can of worms with his proposal.
>
> Frank

I think that gem-alemanic-gsw-alsacian-Latn-fr could be... hmm, no, forget this. 

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

---

From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:16:30 +0100

Nicolas Krebs wrote:
 
> Currently "de" is for German language only, not for all German
> languages or all Germanic languages, in the same way that "fr"
> do not inclue "wa" (Walloon) or "pcd", and "en" do note include
> sco (Scots). 

Yes, Karen mentioned it on the other list, but as Stéphane noted
some days ago some gem languages (not limited to gsw) are close
to de, while others such as frr are not.  From my POV gsw could
also pass as de variant, while frr is a foreign language.  Maybe
it's similar for wa wrt fr, sco wrt en, etc.

> gem-fr would be the best tag for all germanic idioms of/in 

In theory.  It loses the important detail of a close relationship
to only one of fr / en / de (etc.) for the corresponding idioms.

At some point we're down to what the tagger *knows* and *intends*.

 Frank