Kent Karlsson kent.karlsson14 at
Wed Sep 17 20:35:17 CEST 2008

Michael Everson wrote:

I will be happy to approve "acad1959" as that is the most appropriate for this, since the institutional Academy has been engaged in
successive revisions of orthography. The requester indicated that he was satisfied with this. 

Apparently not so.
Anyhow, I, for one, would still like to know why you insist on subdividing (by revision year) something that
has "stayed relatively unchaned for 75 years", while at the same time insisting that other variants that in one
manner of measuring has a 20% difference should use the same variant subtag. I would be very surprised
if something that has "stayed relatively unchanged for 75 years" would show a difference even remotely
approaching 20% by any reasonable manner of measuring (not that I have such a measure at hand).
    /kent k
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list