be-tarask language subtag registration form

GerardM gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Sat Mar 31 13:05:04 CEST 2007


Hoi,
If that is the case then maybe. In the WMF we have had two groups of people
who were bringing conflicting information. I am not convinced about the
information provided. If anything, this is the kind of issue where the
notions of ISO-639-6 would help. Dealing with this in isolation is imho a
bad idea.

It has also been said that there are three orthographies.. the third has not
been discussed at all.

I would urge restraint and have someone who is knowledgeable about this
whole issue report on this before you would accept any code. I would also
make sure that there are acceptable names for these orhtographies in
Belarus. Be aware that we can get ourselves in diplomatic hot water about
this.

Thanks,
     Gerard

On 3/31/07, Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote:
>
> zedlik wrote:
>
> > in Internet Taraskievica is used much oftener than Narkamauka
>
> If that's the case it could be better to register both variants,
> maybe using "1933" or "1959" for the official orthography.
>
> The application I've in mind are spell checkers, they could ask
> the user or pick a user defined default for "be" texts without
> variant, and otherwise they'd use "tarask" vs. "1993" or "1959".
>
> Frank
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20070331/663d65f6/attachment.html


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list