Request: Language Code "de-DE-1996"

[Michael Everson]

At 17:01 -0500 2002-04-23, Peter_Constable@sil.org wrote:

>My assumption: I gather from what you're saying, then, that people probably
>wouldn't want to tag specifically orthography distinctions that are based
>on country (i.e. orthography but not vocabulary), but they would want to
>distinguish spellings according to the 1901 and 1996 conventions, and they
>would want to distinguish data sets that use country-specific vocabulary
>(and which will also follow either the 1901 or 1996 conventions). If that
>is the case, then it would seem to me that what we need are
>
>de-1901
>de-1901-DE
>de-1901-CH
>de-1901-[etc.]
>de-1996
>de-1996-DE
>de-1996-CH
>de-1996-[etc.]
>
>where de-1901 and de-1996 tell us what spellings are used, but don't
>distinguish with regard to vocabulary, and where de-1901-xx and de-1996-xx
>distinguish both vocabulary and spelling.

I agree with Peter, and I find that RFC 3066 permits this. Subtags 
can be alphabetic or numeric.

Shall we proceed? Does anyone say NO?
-- 
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com