Re: Fw: Language tags

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Steve Underwood <steveu coppice org> writes:

> > Since the form I'm proposing for Pango script tags is to use the RFC
> > 3066 form, with arbitrary numbers of subcomponents, and no
> > interpretation of the subcomponents, I believe it should be no problem
> > to accomodate future extensions. If the use of multiple different tags
> > for the same language becomes frequent, than an aliasing mechanism
> > might be necessary, but that should be easy to add.
> 
> One things Peter Constable said intrigued me, though. He described the
> plane 14 Unicode tags as a Bad Idea. From what I have seen they are not
> bad, but just inappropriate. In all cases I understand they seem to be a
> reasonable indicator of spoken language, and would therefore be
> appropriate tags for speech processing. They just don't cut it for
> script processing. If that is not generally the case I would be
> interested to know.

I believe the objection to these tags is not what they contain,
but their very existence --- language tags are considered
to belong in higher level markup, not in plain text.

Regards,
                                        Owen