The limit of language codes
mgunn at egt.ie
Tue Feb 20 12:45:53 CET 2007
Trying to silence discussion never solved a problem, Doug.
These are the facts:
1. Great Britain (GB) excludes Ireland;
2. United Kingdom (UK) includes part of Ireland.
3. Inability/refusal to accept that difference also tends to mark
people unable/unwilling to accept the difference between Iran and
The specific importance of such difference to laguage tag matters may
be thus illustrated:
4. ga-uk, gd-uk, cy-uk, en-uk all make sense;
5. gd-gb, cy-gb, en-gb also make sense;
6. ga-gb makes no sense (see 1 above).
7. ga-gb is very misleading (ditto).
Can anyone say who are the members of ISO 3166/RA, and what position
each of those individuals took on the misleading nature of ga-gb when
their most recent debate on this matter took place, Doug?
On 19 Feb 2007, at 20:53, scríobh Doug Ewell:
> Marion Gunn <mgunn at egt dot ie> wrote:
>> Inevitably en-uk.
> When ISO 3166/MA withdraws GB as their code element for United
> Kingdom and assigns UK in its place, we can have this discussion.
Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
* mgunn at egt.ie * eamonn at egt.ie *
More information about the Ietf-languages