be-tarask

[Jeremy Carroll]

That's well-argued.
I guess I shift to being neutral.

Jeremy

Ciarán Ó Duibhín wrote:
> Two points I'd like to make on this.
> 
> 1. For a registration to be useful, it must be clear what it refers to.
> When this is not obvious from the name of the subtag, the minimum
> explanation is to mention somewhere in the "record requested" section of the
> application the name or names by which the variety is commonly known.
> Establishing those names is an objective matter, and nothing to do with what
> anyone thinks the variety ought or ought not to be called.
> 
> 2. In considering a registration application, we are, in my view, providing
> a service to the potential users of the subtag. Anyone can express a view on
> subjective matters, but among those views, the views of the potential users
> of the subtag carry greatest weight with me.
> 
> I have no personal opinion on the orthographical situation in Belarus.  The
> above points do not depend on having such an opinion.  They would apply
> equally if the situation were reversed (ie. if the "classical" people were
> seeking to influence the description of an "official" subtag).
> 
> The relevant features of the proposal of 31 March
> (http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/2007-March/006155.html)
> are:
> 
> In the "Record requested" section:
> • there is no mention of "classical" in the subtag name
> • there is no mention of "classical" in the description
> • the comments read: "Belarusian in so called classical orthography or
> Taraskievica"
> 
> In the additional fields of the application, outside the "record requested"
> section:
> • the "intended meaning of the subtag" includes the words "Taraskievica
> orthography (or so called classical orthography)"
> • the reference field includes a book entitled "Bielaruski klasycny
> pravapis"
> • there is no mention of "classical" in "any other relevant information"
> 
> Considering that "classical" is the epithet preferred by users of the
> orthography, I consider that the proposal already bends over backwards to
> meet the objections to that choice of word. I do not feel that any further
> reduction in the prominence of that word, leading to its complete deletion
> from the "record requested", is proper or helpful, and I would support the
> proposal as made.
> 
> Ciarán Ó Duibhín
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England