2011/8/31 Doug Ewell <doug_at_ewellic.org>:
> The solution would have been easy:
>
> - use www.example.org for the generic site
> - use www.en.example.org for the English-language site
> - use www.fr.example.org for the French-language site
> - use www.www.example.org (and only that) for the Wawa site
>
> No need for private-use identifiers here. (I agree that coding
> standards like 639 should have private-use areas, but not to extend the
> standard beyond its intended scope as Philippe suggests in his last
> paragraph.)
I've not suggested that. he scope of ISO 639 remains exactly the same
even if it reserves a private-user area, that it does not need to
specify. Much like in ISO 3166 with its private use codes.
I maintain that *any* standard that wants to unify past standards,
needs a private-use area (this includes the UCS of course). This is
architectural and needed for long-term stability of the standard
itself, as a solution against many incompatible variations (called
"hacked encodings"), something that has occured a lot before the
creation and unification of the UCS, creating a nightmare of
ambiguities for transcoders: it's safer to isolate those few needed
deviations in a space that will manage those exceptions, and for which
unified solutions will emerge later as part of the core standard.
-- Philippe.
Received on Wed Aug 31 2011 - 13:00:36 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Aug 31 2011 - 13:00:36 CDT