Proposed new record and registration form for 'acad1959'

Phillips, Addison addison at
Wed Sep 17 17:43:28 CEST 2008

Yes, since one of the outcomes can be an extension of the discussion period.

However, the decision to extend can be appealed to prevent the reviewer from failing to decide by infinitely extending the review time. At some point, if the discussion becomes circular or divides into different camps that cannot resolve their differences, the reviewer can and should decide one way or the other. As John Cowan often points out, this is *not* a democracy or a voting institution. It is a monarchy. Ultimately, the reviewer is supposed to be an expert and is to consider the various positions, apply aforementioned expert knowledge, and enunciate a decision (taking into account the feedback and input on the list). If one or another party is aggrieved by the result, they can appeal the decision. If all we’re arguing about is how to spell the subtag for ‘akadem’/’1959akad’, the reviewer could decide it and approve a specific subtag, giving reasons why.

I am okay with the reviewer saying officially that a review period is extended, so long as the discussion is progressing or appears to be headed towards a rough consensus. The point at which this is no longer appropriate depends on one’s point of view (one reason why an extension can be appealed)---your opinion of “substantial discussion” and mine may differ.


Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

From: ietf-languages-bounces at [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at] On Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 6:46 AM
To: Mark Davis
Cc: ietf-languages at; Doug Ewell
Subject: Re: Proposed new record and registration form for 'acad1959'

What I do not understand it this "best common practice" is that there is a fixed period in which an official reply is to be made even when substantial discussion has not died down.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Mark Davis <mark at<mailto:mark at>> wrote:
You cannot do this. This does not reflect any submitted registration form (see other thread). If someone else wants a 1959 version they can do it, but I didn't submit this. Note that I agree to the removal of "narkamauka" in my form, but am just awaiting clarity that that is the only stumbling block before submitting another form (because that restarts the clock).


On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Doug Ewell <doug at<mailto:doug at>> wrote:
Here is the relevant information for the Belarusian subtag.  Note that I
have removed the part of the Description field that mentions
"narkamauka" in accordance with Mark's consent to do so:

This information may be submitted to IANA as early as 2008-09-24 (13:00
UTC) if there is no further objection.


Type: variant
Subtag: acad1959
Description: "academic" ("governmental") variant of Belarusian
Added: 2008-xx-xx
Prefix: be


1. Name of requester:

Ihar Mahaniok,
Mark Davis

2. E-mail address of requester:

mahaniok at<> markdavis at<>

3. Record Requested:

Type: variant
Subtag: acad1959
Description: "academic" ("governmental") variant of Belarusian
Prefix: be

4. Intended meaning of the subtag:

To distinguish the "academic" (or "governmental") variant from the other
forms of "be" (Belarusian). Currently, that is not possible to do, since
"be" includes all varieties of Belarusian, including tarask

5. Reference to published description of the language (book or article):

* [Compendium 2003] Belarusian language. Linguistic compendium —
Б. А., Антанюк Л. А. Беларуская мова. Лінгвістычны кампендыум. — Мн. :
Інтэрпрэссэрвіс, Кніжны Дом, 2003. — 672 с. ISBN 985-482-033-5, ISBN
* [Potekhina 2003] Studying the Belarusian in the environment of
Belarusian-Belarusian bilinguism — Е. А. Потехина (Минск — Ольштын).
Обучение белорусскому языку в условиях белорусско-белорусского двуязычия
(проблемы обучения белорусскому языку как иностранному) // Исследование
славянских языков и литератур в высшей школе: достижения и перспективы:
Информационные материалы и тезисы докладов международной научной
/ Под ред. В. П. Гудкова, А. Г. Машковой, С. С. Скорвида. —
М.:[Филологический факультет МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова], 2003. — 317 с.
* [Padluzhny 1999] Linguistical problematic in terminology — Мовазнаўчая
праблематыка ў тэрміналогіі // Тэорыя і практыка беларускай тэрміналогіі
Арашонкава Г. У., Булыка А. М., Люшцік У. В., Падлужны А. І.; Навук.
рэд. А.
І. Падлужны. — Мн.:Беларуская навука, 1999. — 175 с. ISBN 985-08-0317-7.
* [Pravapis 2005] The classical orthography - modern normalisation.
* [Klimaw 2004] Клімаў І. Два стандарты беларускай літаратурнай мовы
// Мова і соцыум. (TERRA ALBA. Том ІІІ). Магілёў, ГА МТ „Брама".

6. Any other relevant information:

In the modern Belarusian language there are two literary norms (cf.
[Compendium 2003], [Klimaw 2004]).

The "academic" (normative, literary) form, existing in a relatively
unchanged form for 75 years, is taught in the state school educational
system. This norm is used for the official and state uses of Belarusian
language. It is defined by an Institute of Linguistics of Academy of
Sciences of Belarus.

Another literary norm is the "Tarashkevitsa" (also referred to as a
"classical") form, and has a registered variant in the language subtag
registry already.

The differences are mainly in the orthography, but also in morphology,
syntax, vocabulary (cf. [Klimaw 2004], [Potekhina 2003], [Padluzhny


Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14  ˆ

Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at<mailto:Ietf-languages at>

Ietf-languages mailing list
Ietf-languages at<mailto:Ietf-languages at>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list