Re: [geolang-comment] National and official languages (was: Quo vadis,GeoLang?)

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Lars Marius Garshol
| 
| Having covered ISO 639 it should be really easy to cover RFC 3066,
| and I think the value of RFC 3066 is great enough to justify doing
| it.

* John Cowan
| 
| Good.  I am also in the process of getting review for a list of 225
| MORE (you've seen 56%):
| "national or official language" codes: these are things like fr-FR,
| en-US, de-AT, and so on.  These are allowed by both ISO 639 and RFC 3066,
| but in principle anything can be used, even oddities like en-DE,
| fr-RU, and nv-AU.

That's very good. I've felt it was a weakness of RFC 3066 that many
people were using codes of this form which were not in the registry.
This would solve that problem.
 
| If anyone wants to review the list, 

I would like to, but time pressure forces me to decline. I'm going to
find it difficult to do all the stuff I absolutely must do as it is.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >