sl-rozaj at ISO and Ethnologue

[Doug Ewell]

Han Steenwijk <han dot steenwijk at unipd dot it> wrote:

>> I do not recall seeing such a request brought before the Joint
>> Advisory Committee. I suggest that you contact the Library of
>> Congress and the Ethnologue regarding the status of your requests.
>
> Seven days ago, I wrote to both the Library of Congress
> (iso639-2 at loc.gov) and the Ethnologue (Editor_Ethnologue at sil.org), but
> their reactions are succinctly summed up by Lennon/McCartney: "No
> reply" ("Beatles For Sale", Parlophone PMC 1240, 1964).
>
> Where do we go from here?

I don't know whether seven days (or even "Eight Days a Week") is a
reasonable time in which to expect a response -- I've waited longer than
that for responses to my bug reports against UN/LOCODE -- but as an
ietf-languages member, LTRU member, and fellow Beatles fan, my
suggestion would be to wait until RFC 3066bis is approved and published,
and then propose your eight sub-dialects as "variant subtags" under that
document.

Looking ahead somewhat, variant subtags that do not begin with a digit
must be at least 5 characters long, and so I would humbly suggest:

1994    Standard Resian
biski    Bela (sub-)dialect, San Giorgio (sub-)dialect
lipav    Lipavac (sub-)dialect, Lipovaz (sub-)dialect
njiva    Njiva (sub-)dialect, Gniva (sub-)dialect
osoja    Osojane (sub-)dialect, Oseacco (sub-)dialect
ravan    Ravanca (sub-)dialect, Prato (sub-)dialect
solba    Solbica (sub-)dialect, Stolvizza (sub-)dialect
ucjaa    Ucja (sub-)dialect, Uccea (sub-)dialect

to be proposed as variant subtags with a Prefix of "sl-rozaj", based on
your requests from October 2003.  But not yet.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/