RE: Locale ID's again: simplified vs. traditional

• Next message: Otto Stolz: "http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/psdk/winbase/unicode_192r.htm"
• Previous message: J%ORG KNAPPEN: "Missing mathematical character discovered"
• Maybe in reply to: Steven R. Loomis: "Locale ID's again: simplified vs. traditional"
• Next in thread: Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com: "RE: Locale ID's again: simplified vs. traditional"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Ar 13:55 -0800 2000-10-03, scríobh Peter_Constable@sil.org:

>- The use of ISO 15924 for "sub-language specifications" has been removed
>from the draft for the successor to RFC-1766 because there was no consensus
>that the meaning and usage of these was clear.

I don't thank this means they are forbidden in tags, though. It just means
we weren't sure they were universally applicable enough to be specified in
the RFC.

Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Vox +353 1 478 2597 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Mob +353 86 807 9169
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

• Next message: Otto Stolz: "http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/psdk/winbase/unicode_192r.htm"
• Previous message: J%ORG KNAPPEN: "Missing mathematical character discovered"
• Maybe in reply to: Steven R. Loomis: "Locale ID's again: simplified vs. traditional"
• Next in thread: Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com: "RE: Locale ID's again: simplified vs. traditional"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:14 EDT