What "be" means

Frank Ellermann nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Thu Aug 28 02:47:13 CEST 2008

Michael Everson wrote:

>> What we are talking about here are subvarieties of
>> be-Latn, not of be in general.
> Really?

No.  We're AFAIK talking about "be-Cyrl", same idea
as for the existing tarask variant.  "be-Latn" was
another can of worms mentioned in the tarask debate.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list