acade - LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM
yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Wed Aug 27 07:58:56 CEST 2008
Peter Constable wrote:
> MD> I asked for the native Belarusian equivalent and it is (romanized) "akademic".
> So, how about "beakad": it makes use of the standard Romanization and is completely freed of the vagueness of "academy".
> I know, someone will likely complain that it has redundant information by including "be". But these are only arbitrary symbols -- "x9wp7ss" would do just as well at representing the intended semantic -- though we do like to go for a tag with some mnemonic qualities. If you want mnemonic without any "be" redundancy, then the only alternatives are something like "YYYYakad", using an arbitrary date (per Yury's comments), or something like "akademic" which is mnemonic of a fairly generic semantic and not the narrow semantic that's intended.
I don't think bunching the ISO code and piece of romanized "academy" is
Anyway, how "be-beakad" is better than "be-academy"? Could there be any
other academy there? Or en-beakad? Come on.
I see this as a problems creation, not solution.
After all, the vaguest "-tarask" was registered, wasn't it?
What's the problem with comparatively more stable "-academy"?
More information about the Ietf-languages