Network Working Group H. Alvestrand
Request for Comments: 3066 Cisco Systems
BCP: 47 January 2001
Obsoletes: 1766
Category: Best Current Practice
Network Working Group H. Alvestrand
Request for Comments: 3066 Cisco Systems
BCP: 47 January 2001
Obsoletes: 1766
Category: Best Current Practice
Tags for the Identification of Languages
用于识别语言的标记
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本文件规定了互联网社区的最佳现行做法，并要求进行讨论和提出改进建议。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2001年）。版权所有。
Abstract
摘要
This document describes a language tag for use in cases where it is desired to indicate the language used in an information object, how to register values for use in this language tag, and a construct for matching such language tags.
本文档描述了一种语言标记，用于指示信息对象中使用的语言、如何注册该语言标记中使用的值以及用于匹配此类语言标记的构造。
Human beings on our planet have, past and present, used a number of languages. There are many reasons why one would want to identify the language used when presenting information.
我们星球上的人类过去和现在都使用过多种语言。有许多原因可以解释为什么人们希望识别在呈现信息时使用的语言。
In some contexts, it is possible to have information available in more than one language, or it might be possible to provide tools (such as dictionaries) to assist in the understanding of a language.
在某些情况下，可以使用多种语言提供信息，或者可以提供工具（如词典）来帮助理解一种语言。
Also, many types of information processing require knowledge of the language in which information is expressed in order for that process to be performed on the information; for example spell-checking, computer-synthesized speech, Braille, or high-quality print renderings.
此外，许多类型的信息处理需要了解信息表达的语言，以便对信息执行该处理；例如拼写检查、计算机合成语音、盲文或高质量打印渲染。
One means of indicating the language used is by labeling the information content with an identifier for the language that is used in this information content.
指示所使用的语言的一种方法是，用该信息内容中使用的语言的标识符标记信息内容。
This document specifies an identifier mechanism, a registration function for values to be used with that identifier mechanism, and a construct for matching against those values.
本文档指定了一个标识符机制、用于与该标识符机制一起使用的值的注册函数，以及用于与这些值匹配的构造。
The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不得”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照[RFC 2119]中所述进行解释。
The language tag is composed of one or more parts: A primary language subtag and a (possibly empty) series of subsequent subtags.
语言标记由一个或多个部分组成：主语言子标记和一系列后续子标记（可能为空）。
The syntax of this tag in ABNF [RFC 2234] is:
ABNF[RFC 2234]中此标记的语法为：
Language-Tag = Primary-subtag *( "-" Subtag )
语言标记=主子标记*（“-”子标记）
Primary-subtag = 1*8ALPHA
Primary-subtag = 1*8ALPHA
Subtag = 1*8(ALPHA / DIGIT)
Subtag = 1*8(ALPHA / DIGIT)
The productions ALPHA and DIGIT are imported from RFC 2234; they denote respectively the characters A to Z in upper or lower case and the digits from 0 to 9. The character "-" is HYPHEN-MINUS (ABNF: %x2D).
产品α和数字从RFC 2234进口；它们分别表示大写或小写的字符A到Z以及0到9之间的数字。字符“-”是连字符减号（ABNF:%x2D）。
All tags are to be treated as case insensitive; there exist conventions for capitalization of some of them, but these should not be taken to carry meaning. For instance, [ISO 3166] recommends that country codes are capitalized (MN Mongolia), while [ISO 639] recommends that language codes are written in lower case (mn Mongolian).
所有标签应视为不区分大小写；其中一些货币的资本化已有惯例，但这些惯例不应被视为具有意义。例如，[ISO 3166]建议国家代码大写（蒙古语），而[ISO 639]建议语言代码小写（蒙古语）。
The namespace of language tags is administered by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) [RFC 2860] according to the rules in section 3 of this document.
语言标记的名称空间由互联网分配号码管理局（IANA）[RFC 2860]根据本文件第3节中的规则进行管理。
The following rules apply to the primary subtag:
以下规则适用于主子标记：
- All 2-letter subtags are interpreted according to assignments found in ISO standard 639, "Code for the representation of names of languages" [ISO 639], or assignments subsequently made by the ISO 639 part 1 maintenance agency or governing standardization bodies. (Note: A revision is underway, and is expected to be released as
- 所有两个字母的子标签均根据ISO标准639“语言名称表示代码”[ISO 639]中的分配进行解释，或随后由ISO 639第1部分维护机构或管理标准化机构进行分配。（注：修订正在进行中，预计将作为
ISO 639-1:2000)
ISO 639-1:2000）
- All 3-letter subtags are interpreted according to assignments found in ISO 639 part 2, "Codes for the representation of names of languages -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code [ISO 639-2]", or assignments subsequently made by the ISO 639 part 2 maintenance agency or governing standardization bodies.
- 所有三个字母的子标签均根据ISO 639第2部分“语言名称表示代码——第2部分：Alpha-3代码[ISO 639-2]”中的分配进行解释，或根据ISO 639第2部分维护机构或管理标准化机构随后进行的分配进行解释。
- The value "i" is reserved for IANA-defined registrations
- 值“i”保留给IANA定义的注册
- The value "x" is reserved for private use. Subtags of "x" shall not be registered by the IANA.
- 值“x”保留供私人使用。IANA不得注册“x”的子标签。
- Other values shall not be assigned except by revision of this standard.
- 除本标准修订外，不得指定其他值。
The reason for reserving all other tags is to be open towards new revisions of ISO 639; the use of "i" and "x" is the minimum we can do here to be able to extend the mechanism to meet our immediate requirements.
保留所有其他标签的原因是对ISO 639的新修订开放；使用“i”和“x”是我们在这里能够扩展该机制以满足当前需求的最低要求。
The following rules apply to the second subtag:
以下规则适用于第二个子标记：
- All 2-letter subtags are interpreted as ISO 3166 alpha-2 country codes from [ISO 3166], or subsequently assigned by the ISO 3166 maintenance agency or governing standardization bodies, denoting the area to which this language variant relates.
- 所有两个字母的子标签被解释为[ISO 3166]中的ISO 3166 alpha-2国家代码，或随后由ISO 3166维护机构或管理标准化机构指定，表示该语言变体所涉及的领域。
- Tags with second subtags of 3 to 8 letters may be registered with IANA, according to the rules in chapter 5 of this document.
- 根据本文件第5章的规定，第二个子标签为3至8个字母的标签可向IANA注册。
- Tags with 1-letter second subtags may not be assigned except after revision of this standard.
- 除非本标准修订后，否则不得分配带有1个字母秒子标签的标签。
There are no rules apart from the syntactic ones for the third and subsequent subtags.
除了第三个子标签和后续子标签的语法规则外，没有其他规则。
Tags constructed wholly from the codes that are assigned interpretations by this chapter do not need to be registered with IANA before use.
完全根据本章指定的代码构建的标签在使用前无需向IANA注册。
The information in a subtag may for instance be:
子标签中的信息例如可以是：
- Country identification, such as en-US (this usage is described in ISO 639)
- 国家标识，如en US（此用法在ISO 639中描述）
- Dialect or variant information, such as en-scouse
- 方言或变体信息，如欧洲方言
- Languages not listed in ISO 639 that are not variants of any listed language, which can be registered with the i-prefix, such as i-tsolyani
- ISO 639中未列出的语言，不是任何列出的语言的变体，可以使用i前缀注册，如i-tsolyani
- Region identification, such as sgn-US-MA (Martha's Vineyard Sign Language, which is found in the state of Massachusetts, US)
- 地区识别，如sgn US MA（美国马萨诸塞州玛莎葡萄园手语）
This document leaves the decision on what tags are appropriate or not to the registration process described in section 3.
本文件将决定哪些标签适用于第3节所述的注册流程。
ISO 639 defines a maintenance agency for additions to and changes in the list of languages in ISO 639. This agency is:
ISO 639定义了一个维护机构，用于添加和更改ISO 639中的语言列表。该机构是：
International Information Centre for Terminology (Infoterm) P.O. Box 130 A-1021 Wien Austria
国际术语信息中心（Infoterm）邮政信箱130 A-1021维也纳奥地利
Phone: +43 1 26 75 35 Ext. 312
Fax: +43 1 216 32 72
Phone: +43 1 26 75 35 Ext. 312
Fax: +43 1 216 32 72
ISO 639-2 defines a maintenance agency for additions to and changes in the list of languages in ISO 639-2. This agency is:
ISO 639-2为ISO 639-2中语言列表的添加和更改定义了维护机构。该机构是：
Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office Washington, D.C. 20540 USA
美国国会图书馆网络发展和MARC标准办公室华盛顿特区20540
Phone: +1 202 707 6237
Fax: +1 202 707 0115
URL: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639
Phone: +1 202 707 6237
Fax: +1 202 707 0115
URL: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639
The maintenance agency for ISO 3166 (country codes) is:
ISO 3166（国家代码）的维护机构为：
ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency Secretariat c/o DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung Burggrafenstrasse 6 Postfach 1107 D-10787 Berlin Germany
ISO 3166维护机构秘书处，转交德国柏林师范学院6 Postfach 1107 D-10787
Phone: +49 30 26 01 320
Fax: +49 30 26 01 231
URL: http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/
Phone: +49 30 26 01 320
Fax: +49 30 26 01 231
URL: http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/
ISO 3166 reserves the country codes AA, QM-QZ, XA-XZ and ZZ as user-assigned codes. These MUST NOT be used to form language tags.
ISO 3166将国家代码AA、QM-QZ、XA-XZ和ZZ保留为用户指定的代码。这些标记不能用于形成语言标记。
One may occasionally be faced with several possible tags for the same body of text.
对于同一文本体，有时可能会遇到几个可能的标记。
Interoperability is best served if all users send the same tag, and use the same tag for the same language for all documents. If an application has requirements that make the rules here inapplicable, the application protocol specification MUST specify how the procedure varies from the one given here.
如果所有用户发送相同的标记，并对所有文档使用相同的语言使用相同的标记，则互操作性将得到最好的服务。如果应用程序的要求使此处的规则不适用，则应用程序协议规范必须指定该过程与此处给出的过程之间的差异。
The text below is based on the set of tags known to the tagging entity.
以下文本基于标记实体已知的标记集。
1. Use the most precise tagging known to the sender that can be ascertained and is useful within the application context.
1. 使用发送方已知的最精确的标记，该标记可以确定并且在应用程序上下文中很有用。
2. When a language has both an ISO 639-1 2-character code and an ISO 639-2 3-character code, you MUST use the tag derived from the ISO 639-1 2-character code.
2. 当一种语言同时具有ISO 639-1 2字符代码和ISO 639-2 3字符代码时，必须使用源自ISO 639-1 2字符代码的标记。
3. When a language has no ISO 639-1 2-character code, and the ISO 639-2/T (Terminology) code and the ISO 639-2/B (Bibliographic) code differ, you MUST use the Terminology code. NOTE: At present, all languages for which there is a difference have 2-character codes, and the displeasure of developers about the existence of 2 code sets has been adequately communicated to ISO. So this situation will hopefully not arise.
3. 如果一种语言没有ISO 639-1 2字符代码，且ISO 639-2/T（术语）代码和ISO 639-2/B（书目）代码不同，则必须使用术语代码。注：目前，所有存在差异的语言都有两个字符的代码，开发人员对存在两个代码集的不满已充分传达给ISO。所以这种情况希望不会出现。
4. When a language has both an IANA-registered tag (i-something) and a tag derived from an ISO registered code, you MUST use the ISO tag. NOTE: When such a situation is discovered, the IANA-registered tag SHOULD be deprecated as soon as possible.
4. 当一种语言同时具有IANA注册标记（i-something）和从ISO注册代码派生的标记时，必须使用ISO标记。注意：当发现这种情况时，应尽快弃用IANA注册的标记。
5. You SHOULD NOT use the UND (Undetermined) code unless the protocol in use forces you to give a value for the language tag, even if the language is unknown. Omitting the tag is preferred.
5. 您不应该使用UND（待定）代码，除非使用的协议强制您为语言标记提供值，即使语言未知。最好省略标记。
6. You SHOULD NOT use the MUL (Multiple) tag if the protocol allows you to use multiple languages, as is the case for the Content-Language: header.
6. 如果协议允许您使用多种语言，则不应使用MUL（Multiple）标记，如Content Language:header。
NOTE: In order to avoid versioning difficulties in applications such as that of RFC 1766, the ISO 639 Registration Authority Joint Advisory Committee (RA-JAC) has agreed on the following policy statement:
注：为了避免RFC 1766等应用程序的版本控制困难，ISO 639注册管理局联合咨询委员会（RA-JAC）同意以下政策声明：
"After the publication of ISO/DIS 639-1 as an International Standard, no new 2-letter code shall be added to ISO 639-1 unless a 3-letter code is also added at the same time to ISO 639-2. In addition, no language with a 3-letter code available at the time of publication of ISO 639-1 which at that time had no 2-letter code shall be subsequently given a 2-letter code."
“ISO/DIS 639-1作为国际标准发布后，除非在ISO 639-2中同时添加了3个字母的代码，否则不得在ISO 639-1中添加新的2个字母的代码。此外，在ISO 639-1发布时没有2个字母的代码的语言随后也不得给出n两个字母的代码。“
This will ensure that, for example, a user who implements "hwi" (Hawaiian), which currently has no 2-letter code, will not find his or her data invalidated by eventual addition of a 2-letter code for that language."
例如，这将确保实现“hwi”（夏威夷语）的用户（目前没有两个字母的代码）不会因为最终添加该语言的两个字母的代码而发现其数据无效。”
The language tag always defines a language as spoken (or written, signed or otherwise signaled) by human beings for communication of information to other human beings. Computer languages such as programming languages are explicitly excluded. There is no guaranteed relationship between languages whose tags begin with the same series of subtags; specifically, they are NOT guaranteed to be mutually intelligible, although it will sometimes be the case that they are.
语言标签总是将一种语言定义为人类所说（或书写、签署或以其他方式发出信号）的语言，用于与其他人交流信息。计算机语言（如编程语言）被明确排除在外。标记以同一系列子标记开头的语言之间没有保证的关系；具体来说，它们不能保证相互理解，尽管有时它们是相互理解的。
The relationship between the tag and the information it relates to is defined by the standard describing the context in which it appears. Accordingly, this section can only give possible examples of its usage.
标签与其相关信息之间的关系由描述其出现的上下文的标准定义。因此，本节只能给出其用法的可能示例。
- For a single information object, it could be taken as the set of languages that is required for a complete comprehension of the complete object. Example: Plain text documents.
- 对于单个信息对象，可以将其视为完整理解完整对象所需的一组语言。示例：纯文本文档。
- For an aggregation of information objects, it should be taken as the set of languages used inside components of that aggregation. Examples: Document stores and libraries.
- 对于信息对象的聚合，应将其视为该聚合组件内部使用的语言集。示例：文档存储和库。
- For information objects whose purpose is to provide alternatives, the set of tags associated with it should be regarded as a hint that the content is provided in several languages, and that one has to inspect each of the alternatives in order to find its language or languages. In this case, a tag with multiple languages does not mean that one needs to be multi-lingual to get complete understanding of the document. Example: MIME multipart/alternative.
- 对于旨在提供备选方案的信息对象，与之相关联的标记集应被视为一种提示，表明内容是以多种语言提供的，并且必须检查每个备选方案才能找到其语言。在这种情况下，使用多种语言的标记并不意味着需要使用多种语言才能完全理解文档。示例：MIME多部分/alternative。
- In markup languages, such as HTML and XML, language information can be added to each part of the document identified by the markup structure (including the whole document itself). For example, one could write <span lang="FR">C'est la vie.</span> inside a Norwegian document; the Norwegian-speaking user could then access a French-Norwegian dictionary to find out what the marked section meant. If the user were listening to that document through a speech synthesis interface, this formation could be used to signal the synthesizer to appropriately apply French text-to-speech pronunciation rules to that span of text, instead of misapplying the Norwegian rules.
- 在HTML和XML等标记语言中，可以将语言信息添加到由标记结构标识的文档的每个部分（包括整个文档本身）。例如，一个人可以在挪威文档中写下“生活就是这样”；说挪威语的用户可以访问法语-挪威语词典，以了解标记部分的含义。如果用户正在通过语音合成界面收听该文档，则可以使用该格式向合成器发出信号，以将法语文本到语音发音规则适当应用于该文本范围，而不是误用挪威规则。
Since the publication of RFC 1766, it has become apparent that there is a need to define a term for a set of languages whose tags all begin with the same sequence of subtags.
自RFC1766出版以来，显然有必要为一组标记都以相同子标记序列开头的语言定义一个术语。
The following definition of language-range is derived from HTTP/1.1 [RFC 2616].
以下语言范围的定义源自HTTP/1.1[RFC 2616]。
language-range = language-tag / "*"
language-range = language-tag / "*"
That is, a language-range has the same syntax as a language-tag, or is the single character "*".
也就是说，语言范围与语言标记具有相同的语法，或者是单个字符“*”。
A language-range matches a language-tag if it exactly equals the tag, or if it exactly equals a prefix of the tag such that the first character following the prefix is "-".
如果语言范围与标记完全相等，或者如果它与标记的前缀完全相等，以致前缀后面的第一个字符是“-”，则该语言范围与语言标记匹配。
The special range "*" matches any tag. A protocol which uses language ranges may specify additional rules about the semantics of "*"; for instance, HTTP/1.1 specifies that the range "*" matches only languages not matched by any other range within an "Accept-Language:" header.
特殊范围“*”与任何标记匹配。使用语言范围的协议可以指定关于“*”语义的附加规则；例如，HTTP/1.1指定范围“*”仅匹配“Accept Language:”标头中任何其他范围都不匹配的语言。
NOTE: This use of a prefix matching rule does not imply that language tags are assigned to languages in such a way that it is always true that if a user understands a language with a certain tag, then this user will also understand all languages with tags for which this tag is a prefix. The prefix rule simply allows the use of prefix tags if this is the case.
注意：前缀匹配规则的这种使用并不意味着语言标记分配给语言的方式总是正确的，即如果用户理解具有特定标记的语言，那么该用户也将理解具有该标记作为前缀的标记的所有语言。在这种情况下，前缀规则只允许使用前缀标记。
The procedure given here MUST be used by anyone who wants to use a language tag not given an interpretation in chapter 2.2 of this document or previously registered with IANA.
任何想要使用本文件第2.2章未给出解释或之前在IANA注册的语言标签的人必须使用此处给出的程序。
This procedure MAY also be used to register information with the IANA about a tag defined by this document, for instance if one wishes to make publicly available a reference to the definition for a language such as sgn-US (American Sign Language).
该程序也可用于向IANA注册关于本文件定义的标签的信息，例如，如果希望公开对sgn US（美国手语）等语言定义的参考。
Tags with a first subtag of "x" need not, and cannot, be registered.
第一个子标签为“x”的标签不需要也不能注册。
The process starts by filling out the registration form reproduced below.
这个过程从填写下面复制的登记表开始。
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LANGUAGE TAG REGISTRATION FORM
语言标签登记表
Name of requester :
申请人姓名：
E-mail address of requester:
请求者的电子邮件地址：
Tag to be registered :
要注册的标签：
English name of language :
语言的英文名称：
Native name of language (transcribed into ASCII):
语言的本机名称（转录为ASCII）：
Reference to published description of the language (book or article):
参考已出版的语言描述（书籍或文章）：
Any other relevant information:
任何其他相关信息：
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The language form must be sent to <ietf-languages@iana.org> for a 2- week review period before it can be submitted to IANA. (This is an open list. Requests to be added should be sent to <ietf-languages-request@iana.org>.)
语言表格必须发送至<ietf-languages@iana.org>在提交给IANA之前，进行为期2周的审查。（这是一个开放列表。要添加的请求应发送到<ietf语言-request@iana.org>.)
When the two week period has passed, the language tag reviewer, who is appointed by the IETF Applications Area Director, either forwards the request to IANA@IANA.ORG, or rejects it because of significant objections raised on the list. Note that the reviewer can raise objections on the list himself, if he so desires. The important thing is that the objection must be made publicly.
两周后，IETF应用领域总监指定的语言标签审查员将请求转发给IANA@IANA.ORG，或因名单上提出重大反对意见而拒绝。请注意，如果审阅者愿意，他可以自己在列表上提出异议。重要的是，反对意见必须公开提出。
The applicant is free to modify a rejected application with additional information and submit it again; this restarts the 2-week comment period.
申请人可自由修改被拒绝的申请，并提供额外信息，然后再次提交；这将重新启动2周的评论期。
Decisions made by the reviewer may be appealed to the IESG [RFC 2028] under the same rules as other IETF decisions [RFC 2026]. All registered forms are available online in the directory http://www.iana.org/numbers.html under "languages".
根据与其他IETF决定[RFC 2026]相同的规则，可向IESG[RFC 2028]上诉评审员作出的决定。所有注册表格均可在目录中在线获取http://www.iana.org/numbers.html 在“语言”下。
Updates of registrations follow the same procedure as registrations. The language tag reviewer decides whether to allow a new registrant to update a registration made by someone else; in the normal case, objections by the original registrant would carry extra weight in such a decision.
注册的更新遵循与注册相同的程序。语言标签审阅者决定是否允许新注册者更新其他人的注册；在正常情况下，原始注册人的反对意见在此类决定中具有额外的份量。
There is no deletion of registrations; when some registered tag should not be used any more, for instance because a corresponding ISO 639 code has been registered, the registration should be amended by adding a remark like "DEPRECATED: use <new code> instead" to the "other relevant information" section.
没有删除注册；如果不应再使用某些已注册的标签，例如，因为已注册了相应的ISO 639代码，则应通过在“其他相关信息”部分添加类似“弃用：改用<新代码>的备注”来修改注册。
Note: The purpose of the "published description" is intended as an aid to people trying to verify whether a language is registered, or what language a particular tag refers to. In most cases, reference to an authoritative grammar or dictionary of the language will be useful; in cases where no such work exists, other well known works describing that language or in that language may be appropriate. The language tag reviewer decides what constitutes a "good enough" reference material.
注：“已发布描述”的目的是帮助试图验证某一语言是否已注册或某一特定标记所指的语言的人。在大多数情况下，参考权威的语法或语言词典是有用的；在不存在此类作品的情况下，描述该语言或该语言的其他知名作品可能是合适的。语言标签评审员决定什么构成“足够好”的参考资料。
The only security issue that has been raised with language tags since the publication of RFC 1766, which stated that "Security issues are believed to be irrelevant to this memo", is a concern with language ranges used in content negotiation - that they may be used to infer the nationality of the sender, and thus identify potential targets for surveillance.
自RFC 1766发布以来，语言标签引发的唯一安全问题是内容协商中使用的语言范围，即它们可能被用来推断发送者的国籍，RFC 1766声明“安全问题被认为与本备忘录无关”，从而确定潜在的监视目标。
This is a special case of the general problem that anything you send is visible to the receiving party; it is useful to be aware that such concerns can exist in some cases.
这是一般问题的一个特例，即您发送的任何内容都对接收方可见；意识到这种担忧在某些情况下可能存在是有益的。
The evaluation of the exact magnitude of the threat, and any possible countermeasures, is left to each application protocol.
对威胁的确切程度以及任何可能的对策的评估由每个应用程序协议决定。
Language tags may always be presented using the characters A-Z, a-z, 0-9 and HYPHEN-MINUS, which are present in most character sets, so presentation of language tags should not have any character set issues.
语言标记可能总是使用字符A-Z、A-Z、0-9和连字符减号来表示，这在大多数字符集中都存在，因此语言标记的表示不应该有任何字符集问题。
The issue of deciding upon the rendering of a character set based on the language tag is not addressed in this memo; however, it is thought impossible to make such a decision correctly for all cases unless means of switching language in the middle of a text are defined (for example, a rendering engine that decides font based on Japanese or Chinese language may produce suboptimal output when a mixed Japanese-Chinese text is encountered)
本备忘录未涉及基于语言标记决定字符集呈现的问题；然而，如果不定义文本中间的切换语言（例如，在日文或汉语中决定字体的渲染引擎，当遇到混合的日文中文文本时可能产生次优输出），则认为对于所有情况都不可能正确地做出这样的决定。
This document has benefited from many rounds of review and comments in various fora of the IETF and the Internet working groups.
本文件得益于IETF和互联网工作组在各种论坛上的多轮审查和评论。
Any list of contributors is bound to be incomplete; please regard the following as only a selection from the group of people who have contributed to make this document what it is today.
任何贡献者的名单都是不完整的；请将以下内容视为仅从为本文件的编制做出贡献的人员中选出的一部分。
In alphabetical order:
按字母顺序：
Glenn Adams, Tim Berners-Lee, Marc Blanchet, Nathaniel Borenstein, Eric Brunner, Sean M. Burke, John Clews, Jim Conklin, Peter Constable, John Cowan, Mark Crispin, Dave Crocker, Mark Davis, Martin Duerst, Michael Everson, Ned Freed, Tim Goodwin, Dirk-Willem van Gulik, Marion Gunn, Paul Hoffman, Olle Jarnefors, Kent Karlsson, John Klensin, Alain LaBonte, Chris Newman, Keith Moore, Masataka Ohta, Keld Jorn Simonsen, Otto Stolz, Rhys Weatherley, Misha Wolf, Francois Yergeau and many, many others.
格伦·亚当斯、蒂姆·伯纳斯·李、马克·布兰切特、纳撒尼尔·博伦斯坦、埃里克·布伦纳、肖恩·伯克、约翰·克莱斯、吉姆·康克林、彼得·康斯特布尔、约翰·考恩、马克·克里斯平、戴夫·克罗克、马克·戴维斯、马丁·杜尔斯、迈克尔·埃弗森、内德·弗里德、蒂姆·古德温、德克·威廉·范·古利克、马里恩·冈恩、保罗·霍夫曼、奥利·贾恩福斯、肯特·卡尔森、约翰·克莱辛、，阿兰·拉邦特、克里斯·纽曼、基思·摩尔、大田正传、凯尔德·乔恩·西蒙森、奥托·斯托尔茨、里斯·韦瑟利、米莎·沃尔夫、弗朗索瓦·耶尔盖和许多其他人。
Special thanks must go to Michael Everson, who has served as language tag reviewer for almost the complete period since the publication of RFC 1766, and has provided a great deal of input to this revision.
必须特别感谢Michael Everson，他自RFC1766出版以来几乎在整个时期内担任语言标签评审员，并为本修订版提供了大量的投入。
Harald Tveit Alvestrand Cisco Systems Weidemanns vei 27 7043 Trondheim NORWAY
Harald Tveit Alvestrand Cisco Systems Weidemans vei 27 7043挪威特隆赫姆
Phone: +47 73 50 33 52
EMail: Harald@Alvestrand.no
Phone: +47 73 50 33 52
EMail: Harald@Alvestrand.no
[ISO 639] ISO 639:1988 (E/F) - Code for the representation of names of languages - The International Organization for Standardization, 1st edition, 1988-04-01 Prepared by ISO/TC 37 - Terminology (principles and coordination). Note that a new version (ISO 639-1:2000) is in preparation at the time of this writing.
[ISO 639]ISO 639:1988（E/F）-语言名称表示代码-国际标准化组织，第一版，1988-04-01，由ISO/TC 37编制-术语（原则和协调）。请注意，撰写本文时，新版本（ISO 639-1:2000）正在准备中。
[ISO 639-2] ISO 639-2:1998 - Codes for the representation of names of languages -- Part 2: Alpha-3 code - edition 1, 1998-11- 01, 66 pages, prepared by a Joint Working Group of ISO TC46/SC4 and ISO TC37/SC2.
[ISO 639-2]ISO 639-2:1998-语言名称表示代码-第2部分：Alpha-3代码-第1版，1998-11-01，66页，由ISO TC46/SC4和ISO TC37/SC2联合工作组编制。
[ISO 3166] ISO 3166:1988 (E/F) - Codes for the representation of names of countries - The International Organization for Standardization, 3rd edition, 1988-08-15.
[ISO 3166]ISO 3166:1988（E/F）-国家名称表示代码-国际标准化组织，第3版，1988-08-15。
[RFC 1327] Kille, S., "Mapping between X.400 (1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822", RFC 1327, May 1992.
[RFC 1327]Kille，S.，“X.400（1988）/ISO 10021和RFC 822之间的映射”，RFC 1327，1992年5月。
[RFC 1521] Borenstein, N., and N. Freed, "MIME Part One: Mechanisms for Specifying and Describing the Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 1521, September 1993.
[RFC 1521]Borenstein，N.和N.Freed，“MIME第一部分：指定和描述互联网消息体格式的机制”，RFC 15211993年9月。
[RFC 2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[RFC 2026]Bradner，S.，“互联网标准过程——第3版”，BCP 9，RFC 2026，1996年10月。
[RFC 2028] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996.
[RFC 2028]Hovey，R.和S.Bradner，“参与IETF标准过程的组织”，BCP 11，RFC 2028，1996年10月。
[RFC 2119] Bradner, S."Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC 2119]Bradner，S.“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC 2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
[RFC 2234]Crocker，D.和P.Overell，“语法规范的扩充BNF:ABNF”，RFC 2234，1997年11月。
[RFC 2616] Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P. and T. Berners-Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2616, June 1999.
[RFC 2616]菲尔丁，R.，盖蒂斯，J.，莫卧儿，J.，弗莱斯蒂克，H.，马斯特，L.，利奇，P.和T.伯纳斯李，“超文本传输协议——HTTP/1.1”，RFC 2616，1999年6月。
[RFC 2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F. and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, June 2000.
[RFC 2860]Carpenter，B.，Baker，F.和M.Roberts，“关于互联网分配号码管理局技术工作的谅解备忘录”，RFC 2860，2000年6月。
Appendix A: Language Tag Reference Material
附录A：语言标签参考资料
The Library of Congress, maintainers of ISO 639-2, has made the list of languages registered available on the Internet.
美国国会图书馆是ISO 639-2的维护者，它已经在互联网上公布了注册语言列表。
At the time of this writing, it can be found at
http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html
At the time of this writing, it can be found at
http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html
The IANA registration forms for registered language codes can be found at http://www.iana.org/numbers.html under "languages".
注册语言代码的IANA注册表格可在http://www.iana.org/numbers.html 在“语言”下。
The ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency has published Web pages at
ISO 3166维护机构已在
http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/
http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/
Appendix B: Changes from RFC 1766
附录B：RFC 1766的变更
- Email list address changed from ietf-types@uninett.no to ietf-languages@iana.org
- 电子邮件列表地址已从ietf更改-types@uninett.no到ietf-languages@iana.org
- Updated author's address
- 更新作者地址
- Added language-range construct from HTTP/1.1
- 添加了HTTP/1.1中的语言范围构造
- Added use of ISO 639-2 language codes
- 增加了ISO 639-2语言代码的使用
- Added reference to Library of Congress lists of language codes
- 增加了对国会图书馆语言代码列表的参考
- Changed examples to use registered tags
- 更改示例以使用注册的标记
- Added "Any other information" to registration form
- 在登记表中添加“任何其他信息”
- Added description of procedure for updating registrations
- 增加了更新注册程序的说明
- Changed target category for document from standards track to BCP
- 将文档的目标类别从标准跟踪更改为BCP
- Moved the content-language header definition into another document
- 已将内容语言标题定义移动到另一个文档中
- Added numbers to the permitted characters in language tags
- 为语言标记中允许的字符添加了数字
Full Copyright Statement
完整版权声明
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2001年）。版权所有。
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
本文件及其译本可复制并提供给他人，对其进行评论或解释或协助其实施的衍生作品可全部或部分编制、复制、出版和分发，不受任何限制，前提是上述版权声明和本段包含在所有此类副本和衍生作品中。但是，不得以任何方式修改本文件本身，例如删除版权通知或对互联网协会或其他互联网组织的引用，除非出于制定互联网标准的需要，在这种情况下，必须遵循互联网标准过程中定义的版权程序，或根据需要将其翻译成英语以外的其他语言。
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
上述授予的有限许可是永久性的，互联网协会或其继承人或受让人不会撤销。
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
本文件和其中包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，互联网协会和互联网工程任务组否认所有明示或暗示的保证，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Acknowledgement
确认
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.
RFC编辑功能的资金目前由互联网协会提供。