I also dislike the word "similar" in standards. Not identical? What is
the difference? If the DIS for ODF 1.2 contains this word in usual
paragraphs, I will make sure that Japan will complain about it.
> According to ODF 3.1.15:
>
> "The <dc:language> element specifies the default language of the document.
>
> The manner in which the language is represented is similar to the language
> tag described in [RFC3066]. It consists of a two or three letter Language
> Code taken from the ISO 639 standard optionally followed by a hyphen (-)
> and a two-letter Country Code taken from the ISO 3166 standard."
The second sentence does not allow optional subtags. Such subtags are
allowed in RFC 3066.
> The Dublin Core Usage Guide, 4.15 states:
>
> "Recommended best practice for the values of the Language element is
> defined by RFC 3066 [RFC 3066, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/ rfc3066.txt]
> which, in conjunction with ISO 639 [ISO 639, http://www.oasis-
> open.org/cover/iso639a.html]), defines two- and three-letter primary
> language tags with optional subtags. Examples include "en" or "eng" for
> English, "akk" for Akkadian, and "en-GB" for English used in the United
> Kingdom."
This also allow optional subtags. Does ODF intentionally disallow
subtags? Is the the reason of the word "similar"?
--
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <>
