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

CE Whitehead cewcathar at
Thu Dec 14 01:50:01 CET 2006

Hi, Michael, Stephane again, encore une fois:

Re Michael's comments:
>"How much more? How much less? Is "frm" just to be divided into 
>early/middle/late based on date?"

No it is not; in the 16th and 17th centuries we have French that is no 
longer quite Middle French, (Middle French is pretty comprehensible to 
speakers of Modern French anyway).
But it is not Modern French.

It's still Middle French with some changes.
It's late Middle French if you prefer but some Late Middle French continues 
into the 17th century and is mixed in a single document with Modern French.

So I think the century tags handle the distinction nicely.

It's a finer distinction but I think its appropriate.

It lets me tag a document as either fr or frm and specify that it is the 
16th century variety;
or as fr (and maybe also frm, why not?) and specify that it is the 17th 
century variety (which has got the New World vocabulary and also tends to 
especially by the later part of the 17th century even in the New World have 
some elements of Modern French).

I like being able to tag a document as fr so that it can be retrieved with a 
request for literature in French; the alternative is to tag one as both fr 
and frm but that is not an option always.

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at

WIN up to $10,000 in cash or prizes – enter the Microsoft Office Live 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list