Subject: [Ltru] ways of tagging Chinese

From: Martin Hosken <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:31:34 +0700

Dear All,

In my ongoing quest to try to get my head around this language tagging
thing, please excuse my dumb questions.

I'm starting a collection of ways for tagging Mandarin Chinese using the
Simplified script, one of the most dominant languages in use on the net
at the moment. I've seen:

zh-CN
zh-Hans
zh-Hans-CN
zh-cmn-CN
zh-cmn-Hans
zh-cmn-Hans-CN

These all look OK, but what confuses me are the questions it raises:

1. How does zh-CN imply both cmn and Hans?
2. How is anyone supposed to know that specifying the script of zh
implies cmn?

I suppose one could say that for pure zh, the cmn is redundant and that
removes the last 3 from the list. But the first two are difficult to
resolve as zh-Hans should be matched by zh-CN (semantically, I hasten to
add). It also raises the question, where that information is to be held
so that people not on this list might get hold of it.

So how, in order to be as future proof as we can tell from here, should
I tag Mandarin Chinese in Simplified Script?

Yours,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

---

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 03:03:48 -0400

> at the moment. I've seen:

Here are my glosses of these tags.  In each case, the first sentence is
normative; any later sentences are informative and based on encyclopedic
knowledge.

> zh-CN

"Some variety of Chinese used in the People's Republic.  Probably
Mandarin, but not certainly so.  If textual, probably in simplified
script, but not certainly so.  Historically used to indicate simplified
script specifically, but this interpretation can no longer be treated
as certain since the registration of zh-Hans on 2003-05-30."

> zh-Hans

"Some variety of Chinese written in simplified script.  Probably Mandarin,
but not certainly so."

> zh-Hans-CN

"Some variety of Chinese written in simplified script and in use in the
People's Republic.  Probably Mandarin, but not certainly so."

> zh-cmn-CN

"Mandarin Chinese as used in the People's Republic.  If textual, probably
in simplified script, but not certainly so."

> zh-cmn-Hans

"Mandarin Chinese written in simplified script."

> zh-cmn-Hans-CN

"Mandarin Chinese as used in the People's Republic written in simplified
script."

> 1. How does zh-CN imply both cmn and Hans?

It doesn't imply it, it merely suggests it, as ja suggests the variety
spoken in Japan (ja-JP) but does not imply it.

> 2. How is anyone supposed to know that specifying the script of zh

It's just a fact about written zh that it tends to be zh-cmn.

> I suppose one could say that for pure zh, the cmn is redundant

It is not.  Spoken Cantonese may validly be labeled zh, for zh may be
used for any variety of Chinese.

> It also raises the question, where that information is to be held

One can track back from zh (RFC 4646) to zh (ISO 639-1) to zho
(ISO 639-3) to the explanation of zho on the SIL web site.

> I tag Mandarin Chinese in Simplified Script?

zh-cmn-Hans is already valid.

-- 
At the end of the Metatarsal Age, the dinosaurs     John Cowan
abruptly vanished. The theory that a single         [email-masked]
catastrophic event may have been responsible        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
has been strengthened by the recent discovery of
a worldwide layer of whipped cream marking the
Creosote-Tutelary boundary.             --Science Made Stupid