mahaniok at gmail.com
Mon Sep 15 18:21:54 CEST 2008
> sorry, one more clarification: both of those are just /spellings/, and
> both of them can be written either Cyrillics or Latin; so both of
> those are script-agnostic by default; just, by matter of fact, they
> are overwhelmingly written in Cyrillic.
> be-Cyrl-akadem, be-Cyrl-tarask, be-Latn-akadem, be-Latn-tarask are all
> possible, though not necessary today, I believe.
> Belief is insufficient here. If you believe that all four of those are
> possible, please show us examples of a sentence in each.
That's not a problem, I can, but I don't want to steer the
conversation off the main topic. We are not discussing any of those
four now, we are discussing be-akadem (or be-academy, or be-akad, what
we agree upon) now, which doesn't specify script (but is Cyrillic by
default, propagated down from "be" tag).
More information about the Ietf-languages