be-tarask language subtag registration form

[Peter Constable]

I don't think that's a good comparison. 'scouse' and 'boont' are in a dimension of variation with many different kinds and degrees of contrast, and they're varieties with fairly narrow focus. (They'd be a better comparison if the request were for some uncommon orthography variant.) Here the point seems (to me) to be to establish a contrast between two widely-used varieties -- which (I gather) might effectively be perceived as a binary contrast. Eastern and Western Armenian seems like a better comparison -- unless I've really got the wrong impression about 'be' orthographies.


Peter


-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan at ccil.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 8:55 AM
To: Peter Constable
Cc: ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: be-tarask language subtag registration form

Peter Constable scripsit:

> I definitely think that, if there's a distinction worth coding, then
> both variants need to be coded.

I quite disagree.  We have managed to register 'scouse' and 'boont'
without insisting on a complete registry of the English dialects
and jargons.

Here we have a specific orthography to be registered.  There is need
to discriminate it from the other orthographies, but not to propose
a complete registry of all extant orthographies living and dead.
Time enough for those when someone requests them.

--
Where the wombat has walked,            John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
it will inevitably walk again.          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan