Hi, two problems in draft-phillips-langtags-08.txt : 1 - ISO 3166-1 is dead This memo should not be used in new Internet standards, see <http://www.iab.org/documents/correspondance/2003-09-25-iso-cs-code.html> A reference to some obscure 1998 edition of ISO 3166-1 doesn't help, would it include TL ? What about the numerous dubious "countries" in 3166, not the simple cases like CS, EU, or PS, but RB, RC, FX, EH, BX, SF, or NT ? The draft is about languages, an appendix listing relevant country codes copied from an old ISO 3166-1 version (before CS) should be good enough, and future changes could be handled as IANA registry. Where can I find the NH in en-NH ? It's not in the public list http://www.iso.org/iso/en/prods-services/iso3166ma/02iso-3166-code-lists/iso_3166-1_decoding_table.html?printable=true#AA 2 - Fallback The text explains why en-US-boont matches en-US or en. But it does apparently not match en-boont. That's ugly. If I'd use de-CH-1996, then I want it to to match de-CH or de-1996 before a plain de. (de-1996 => new orthography, de-CH => no ß) Another example in the draft is fr-Latn-CA. I've no idea what other scripts are popular in fr-CA, but maybe fr-CA is somewhat different from fr-FX, and then I wouldn't want a match with fr if fr-CA is also available. A counterexample is sr-Latn-YU, a match with sr-YU or sr won't help if it's in fact sr-Cyrl-YU or sr-Cyrl. In that case the priority "script before region" is okay. In other cases like se-Latn-AX the script is less important than the region. Bye, Frank _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf