sub at zedlik.com
Tue May 1 00:01:00 CEST 2007
CE Whitehead wrote:
CW> but it's no problem [as I understand things]
CW> to change the comments field
CW> to say, instead of,
CW> ". . . orthography as published in . . . "
CW> "orthography, originally catalogued in . . . "
CW> If of course Jaska wants to make the change???)
Fine idea and with such a comments field it is more evident that the
subtag is intended to mark not only 2005 version, but in this case
there is no reference to the classical orthography and this can course
some confusuion. Now the latest variant seems to be the one, which
expresses in some (but not perfect) way intended meaning and which
nobody objects. So I do suggest leaving as it is.
More information about the Ietf-languages