Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants
CE Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
Sat Feb 24 22:51:48 CET 2007
>
>I'd really prefer to avoid a proliferation of language-specific variants
>for this historic orthography, unless it can be shown that the variations
>are fundamentally different from each other, in a way that Latin for
>English, Latin for French, Latin for Hindi, etc. are not.
>
>Suppose we register "nta1926" (just for illustration, not my first choice).
> Then you would have "tt-nta1926", "kk-nta1926", "ba-nta1926", and so
>forth. There should be no need for a Tatar-specific subvariant because
>"tt" already indicates the Tatar language.
>
>Does this makes sense to everyone?
>
>--
>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
>
Sounds fine to me!
Thanks, Doug.
--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at hotmail.com
_________________________________________________________________
With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these few
simple tips.
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=HMFebtagline
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list