Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants

[Doug Ewell]

Reshat Sabiq (Reşat) <tatar dot iqtelif dot i18n at gmail dot com> 
wrote:

> I don't think 1929 is more valid that 1926 or 1927, and i think 1926 
> or 1927, in that order, are better dates. They might have started 
> burning books in Arabic script in 1929, and sped up the process, but 
> unless somebody shows a reference to substantiate 1929, i think it's 
> less valid than 1926 or 1927.

This is one reason I'm not crazy about using dates as variants.  But 
Reşat has expressed a preference, and I said I would support whatever 
his preference was, so there it is.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages