LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: Eastern Armenian

[Mark Davis]

This is a bit of pointless duplication, because what you end up with
(remember the prefix) is:

hy-hywest
hy-hyeast

---

Fundamentally, I sort of don't care. If the group wants to have some
random sequence of letters that few people will understand without
looking at the registry, fine. Here are a couple of arbitrary
sequences of letters (from the top of my keyboard). That will do as
well as anything.

Variant: poiuytre
Prefix: hy
Comment: Western Armenian
...

Variant: ertyuiop
Prefix: hy
Comment: Eastern Armenian
...

Mark

On 9/1/06, Debbie Garside <debbie at ictmarketing.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I agree with Addisons post in most areas.  However, I think that the
> discussion on generic terms (eastern, western, northern etc..) could be
> quite endless.
>
> Don has on several occasions asked how this will impact on the possible
> inclusion of ISO 639-6 and I think that any real discussion with regard to
> dialects would necessarily have to include discussion of ISO 639-6.  I think
> that to have this discussion at this stage would be counter productive in
> facilitating the tags that Mark has requested within an acceptable
> timescale.
>
> I would opt for non-generic tags in this instance and take this discussion
> to the LTRU (once re-chartered) as part of the discussion surrounding
> dialects and ISO 639-6.
>
> I think that Michael's comment wrt "en-western" "en-eastern" highlight the
> probable problems that would be encountered by the introduction of such
> generic terms and one has to think of the precedents being set here.
>
> Peter's original suggestion is perhaps the way forward; it is not beautiful
> John but it does the job. Thus I would propose the following:
>
> ----
>
> hyeast
> hywest
>
> ----
>
> Best regards
>
> Debbie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no
> > [mailto:ietf-languages-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of
> > Addison Phillips
> > Sent: 01 September 2006 17:28
> > To: Michael Everson
> > Cc: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> > Subject: Re: LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM: Eastern Armenian
> >
> > >
> > > That argument doesn't take you very far, given BYZANTINE MUSICAL
> > > SYMBOL DIESIS APLI DYO DODEKATA.
> >
> > I think the argument about the form of the subtag is not very
> > useful in its present form. With proposals for "eastern" and
> > "western", the issue we face is, in my opinion, quite
> > important and should be dealt with
> > directly:
> >
> > 1. We have historical precedent for subtags restricted to a
> > specific dialect. Witnesss 'nedis' and 'rozaj' in the current
> > registry.
> >
> > 2. We do not have a history of registering "generic" subtags.
> > Although 'eastern' and 'western' would initially indicate
> > Armenian dialects, it is quite clear that these subtags could
> > have additional Prefix fields added which would indicate
> > other, unrelated, dialects of other languages.
> >
> > It seems clear to me that there are distinct entities of some
> > sort that Mark needs to tag. The question before us is
> > whether we should expand on precedent and register
> > semi-generic subtags or continue the existing practice of
> > registering very specific subtags for very specific purposes.
> >
> > Personally, I do not support truly generic subtags ('eastern'
> > with no Prefix at all), since I think those subtags would
> > lead to undesirable tag choices and confusion about tag choice.
> >
> > I therefore think that, given current practice, we should not
> > register 'eastern' and 'western' at this time, but we should
> > register subtags (perhaps Michael's suggested ones) with the
> > "same meaning" to meet Mark's needs.
> >
> > I think the argument about how Mark has chosen to split/lump
> > dialects is a chimera: nothing says that competing subtags
> > could not be registered that split Armenian in a "different
> > direction" (possibly for a different application).
> >
> > If Mark feels that semi-generic subtags are actually
> > necessary and that Armenian dialects are just a useful test
> > case, then I think we should have a full-fledged discussion
> > of what the guidelines ought to be for their adoption and use.
> >
> > The use case for semi-generic subtags, in my mind, is not
> > proved by a single case. What we need are four or five
> > languages (exact number not
> > important) that indicate how eastern/western or
> > northern/southern would work in practice.
> >
> > Also: what happens if we have "tlh-western" and a new
> > subdialect "fooish" is registered. Do we do
> > "tlh-western-fooish" or "tlh-fooish"?
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Addison
> >
> > --
> > Addison Phillips
> > Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.
> >
> > Internationalization is an architecture.
> > It is not a feature.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf-languages mailing list
> > Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
> >
>
>
>