Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants

[Doug Ewell]

I'd really prefer to avoid a proliferation of language-specific variants 
for this historic orthography, unless it can be shown that the 
variations are fundamentally different from each other, in a way that 
Latin for English, Latin for French, Latin for Hindi, etc. are not.

Suppose we register "nta1926" (just for illustration, not my first 
choice).  Then you would have "tt-nta1926", "kk-nta1926", "ba-nta1926", 
and so forth.  There should be no need for a Tatar-specific subvariant 
because "tt" already indicates the Tatar language.

Does this makes sense to everyone?

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages