Summary: de-DE-1996 is better than de-1996-DE

[J.Wilkes]

Languages are changing in vocabulary and orthography. 
That's a fact of life, and I accept that. I hope I was not misunderstood in respect to 
that.

Tagging is a way to determine what language and subtype of language a text is in 
before you have actually read the text. It's especially useful to select one version of a 
text you have several variants or translations of.

If a change in language is considered significant, it makes sense to introduce a tag 
for it. 
I do think most agree that the de-1996 changes in orthography significant.

But I was under the impression what Martin wrote in the last Paragraph of his 
summary was an argument against this significance. This may have been a 
misunderstanding; the sentence he was referring to was clarified, so maybe he 
would change that paragraph as well.

If no-one opposes the significance of that change for German language, and the 
need for tags differentiating the orthography before and after that change is agreed 
upon,
we can get back to the topic most postings in the last few days were about: the order 
within the subtags. And hopefully get a result soon.
Maybe we even got one now, and just have to verify that.


My personal preference would be the de-<year>-<country> order, but for many 
reasons, 
	I agree with the de-<country>-<year> order. 
	We should have additional tags for de-1901 and de-1996.

Johannes