Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety ofNorwegian
Leif Halvard Silli
xn--mlform-iua at xn--mlform-iua.no
Sun Jan 3 01:51:43 CET 2010
Randy Presuhn, Sat, 2 Jan 2010 15:52:36 -0800:
> This sounds like a quirk in the localisation of a particular
> system, rather than a question of language tagging. It does
> not support the assertion that 'no' would be a sensible prefix
> for 'hognorsk'.
I feel that what Richard Ishida's Language Subtag Lookup [1] says about
'no' is a good argument. That note notes the existence of precisely
such quirks. (And it also serves as a comment to Doug, who was
surprised to hear that one should avoid using 'no' despite its massive
use.)
]]
no is a macrolanguage that encompasses the following more specific
primary language subtags: nb nn . If it doesn't break legacy usage for
your application, you should use one of these more specific language
subtags instead."
[[
Unless 'nn-hognorsk' breaks my application, then 'no' isn't as sensible
as prefix as 'nn' is. But if 'nn-hognorsk' breaks my application, then
'no' is a sensible alternative prefix.
(Of course, feel free to use 'gem' as prefix if that is the only thing
that saves your day. But then we are far outside the relevant problems
to discuss.)
For instance, I may need to discern between 'nn' and 'nn-hognorsk', but
something breaks so it that 'nn-hognorsk' doesn't work as expected. In
a given, practical situation, I could decide to reserve a bare naked
'no' for Høgnorsk. So then I don't understand why one can't state that
it then would be perfectly sane to use 'no-hognorsk' as well.
[1] http://rishida.net/utils/subtags/index.php?check=no&submit=Check
--
leif halvard silli
More information about the Ietf-languages
mailing list