Hoi,
The standard is flexible. It allows you to add user defined parts. It
allows for language that have no recognised language code. The point is
that the solution for external parties cannot be found in Wikidata itself.
We have to use the standards if we want interoperability. We need
interoperability and we need to define what it is that is expressed. Once
we decide that a specific expression of language is in use, we stick with
that definition. It can only be deprecated if that is what people want.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 April 2017 at 19:10, Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler(a)wikimedia.de>
wrote:
Am 10.04.2017 um 18:56 schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
The standard for the identification of a language should suffice.
I know no standard that would be sufficient for our use case.
For instance, we not only need identifiers for German, Swiss and Austrian
German. We also need identifiers for German German before and after the
spelling
reform of 1901, and before and ofter the spelling reform of 1996. We will
also
need identifiers for the "language" of mathematical notation. And for
various
variants of ancient languages: not just Sumerian, but Sumerian from
different
regions and periods.
The only system I know that gives us that flexibility is Wikidata. For
interoperability, we should provide a standard language code (aka subtag).
But a
language code alone is not going to be sufficient to distinguish the
different
variants we will need.
--
Daniel Kinzler
Principal Platform Engineer
Wikimedia Deutschland
Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata