policy wrt politics (was RE: be-tarask language subtag registration form)

[C Eddie Whitehead]

Yury Tarasievich <yury.tarasievich at gmail.com> wrote: No, no. *I'm not* proposing *any* subtags here.

I just give a bit of *historical background*, as some people asked.

I don't know how the subtags here are defined, so really can't say how
many of Latin "should" be there. For all *practical* purposes, you
could give out *one* and be done with it. But I don't know the
procedure here.

There was no separate orthography for Latin script, only additional
(Polish-like) rule for "L+vowel". By the charset alone, there were
strictly 1) Polish set (mostly 19th cent), 2) Polish+specific letter
"U short" (since end 19th cent.), 3) previous with Czech letters
replacing Polish cz sz z circle (c. mid.1910s), 4) previous with V
replacing W (since end 1930s). I don't have statisticals on how much
of what was used in printing.

Folks, perhaps I'm just boring you and impending the decision process?

Thanks very much Yuri; I was totally lost before when you mentioned the Latin script varieties; now it's much more clear to me what's going on; I need this kind of background to make sense of anything so thanks from me.

As you're not requesting any special subtag for the Latin at this point then this is information in case someone does in the future.

Sincerely,

C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at yahoo.com

 
---------------------------------
Never miss an email again!
Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20070403/51f5650d/attachment.html