Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants

CE Whitehead cewcathar at
Sat Feb 24 22:51:48 CET 2007

>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

Sounds fine to me!
Thanks, Doug.

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar at

With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these few 
simple tips.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list