Generic variants and Armenian dialects

[Peter Constable]

> From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-languages-
> bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Doug Ewell


> > The only bit of your message that worries me is the discussion of
> > "en-1901"...


> Perhaps LTRU
> should consider defining a distinction between this type of "date"
> variant, which could in theory apply to more than one language (even
> though the reforms themselves would be different), and the "usual" type
> such as Resianic or Boontling or Scouse or Eastern [Armenian], which in
> theory could not ("Eastern Quinqui" would not have the same relative
> meaning as "Eastern Armenian," except geographically).

The portion you quoted doesn't appear to prevent us from specifying multiple prefixes for a date variant; it merely suggests (wrongly, I think we can agree) that a new prefix for e.g. 1996 unrelated to DE would probably be rejected. We could revise to make clear that we allow dates to be used with unrelated prefixes -- probably a simple change would do:

"Requests to add a prefix to a non-date variant subtag that imply a different semantic meaning will probably be rejected. (This would be permitted when appropriate for four-digit variant subtags representing dates.) ... "



Peter Constable