Request for variant subtag fr 16th-c 17th-c

[Michael Everson]

At 16:49 -0800 2006-12-12, Mark Davis wrote:

>So "Middle Cornish" refers to the language of the fourteenth and 
>fifteenth centuries, for example. This doesn't mean that Middle 
>Cornish was unchanging during that period, of course, and a scholar 
>could well want to refer to the typically language of the 14th 
>century vs the 15th century. Now, of course, we could go down the 
>line of saying that every time a scholar wants to refer to something 
>on a century level s/he has to go cap in hand to M. Everson and 
>convince him that some unique name should be attached to that 
>variant, or we could provide a mechanism that lets people tag what 
>they want without so doing.

Yeah, right. It's 01:00 and I'm going to have to deal with this 
tomorrow, but you DON'T know anything about Middle Cornish, and it 
DOESN'T fit into this kind of neat-and-tidy century box. Accordingly, 
I am suspicious of neat and tidy boxes. However appealing such 
"quick-and-dirty white-board" ideas might seem "good" to M. Davis, it 
is the case that M. Everson does his job with some diligence, and 
wishes to make sure we do not make a hames of this RFC.

And you didn't say anything about the other 19 centuries CE or the 
BCE centuries either.
-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com