Re: Is LANG appropriate for non-human languages?

Terry Allen (terry@ora.com)
Wed, 2 Aug 95 11:05:08 EDT

================================
>Reading rfc1766, it seems to be intended to cover only human
>languages, although it does make a distinction between script
>variants, as "az-arabic" and "az-cyrillic".

I am kind of ignoring what this distinction could be useful for,
unless there is a innate difference (e.g. vocabulary, grammar,...)
between Azerbaijani when written with Arabic or Cyrillic characters.
================================

One will not be a precise transliteration of the other.

Regards,

-- 
Terry Allen  (terry@ora.com)   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
Editor, Digital Media Group    101 Morris St.
			       Sebastopol, Calif., 95472


A Davenport Group sponsor.  For information on the Davenport 
  Group see ftp://ftp.ora.com/pub/davenport/README.html
	or  http://www.ora.com/davenport/README.html


Current HTML 2.0 spec:  
  ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-html-spec-04.txt