ontology nits (was: acade - LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM)

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Sun Aug 31 10:14:46 CEST 2008

On 31 Aug 2008, at 00:45, Mark Davis wrote:

> But then we'd be missing the umbrella term for both, which is what  
> most people would really like to use.

This is nothing but an assertion.

> (It'd be like having a term for "British English" and one for  
> "American English" and one for Australian (&c.), but no umbrella  
> term for "English" (of any variant). So we'd end up back yet again  
> adding what we should have added in the first place:
> be-akadem

I disagree. As I have said, "Akadem" refers to an institution, not an  
orthography. The institution could in principle publish a very  
different orthography -- Latin for instance -- and if it did so the  
term would in no way be an umbrella term.

I believe that your analogy is false. The umbrella term corresponding  
to "English" is "Belarusian". There is one orthographic subtag  
"tarask". We need another which describes another orthography  
(acad1959 would seem to do) and if later the 2010 variety is published  
and is different enough to warrant a third subtag, then it can be  
registered at that point.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20080831/bd1a117b/attachment.htm 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list