Summary: de-DE-1996 is better than de-1996-DE
Sat, 27 Apr 2002 18:28:55 -0100
Languages are changing in vocabulary and orthography.
That's a fact of life, and I accept that. I hope I was not misunderstood in respect to
Tagging is a way to determine what language and subtype of language a text is in
before you have actually read the text. It's especially useful to select one version of a
text you have several variants or translations of.
If a change in language is considered significant, it makes sense to introduce a tag
I do think most agree that the de-1996 changes in orthography significant.
But I was under the impression what Martin wrote in the last Paragraph of his
summary was an argument against this significance. This may have been a
misunderstanding; the sentence he was referring to was clarified, so maybe he
would change that paragraph as well.
If no-one opposes the significance of that change for German language, and the
need for tags differentiating the orthography before and after that change is agreed
we can get back to the topic most postings in the last few days were about: the order
within the subtags. And hopefully get a result soon.
Maybe we even got one now, and just have to verify that.
My personal preference would be the de-<year>-<country> order, but for many
I agree with the de-<country>-<year> order.
We should have additional tags for de-1901 and de-1996.