Adding variant subtag 'erzgeb' for Erzgebirgisch

Phillips, Addison addison at
Mon Aug 10 17:48:17 CEST 2009

> It would not be appropriate to give two prefixes to a variant meant
> to
> denote only one dialect, merely to point out that we disagree about
> what
> the base language is, or to try to provide perfect linguistic
> derivations.  ...  We must pick one.

This is not true. What the rules prohibit are registrations that completely alter the validity of tags or which narrow the range of acceptable tags. There is no language in 4646 or in 4646bis requiring that we must pick only one.

It is possible that the language subtag reviewer or this list's members might prefer that only one be picked, but the rules permit both to be registered.

Doug, you're correct that all of the current variant subtags that have multiple prefixes have a diverse set of prefixes because they denote things such as transcription. I think in the 4646bis era (in which we have some very fine grained primary language subtags, courtesy of 639-3), that we must be prepared for the possibility of registrations like this, though, in which different prefixes can be reasonably applied to a single variant.

> By "change the tag" I assume you mean deprecate or remove the Prefix 
> field "sxu" and add the Prefix field "vmf".  We cannot remove a Prefix 
> in this way, as it would destabilize the interpretation of content 
> already tagged "sxu-erzgeb".  We can only broaden the existing scope of 
> what the Prefix field(s) denote(s) for any given variant.

This is entirely correct. You could add the prefix 'vmf', however, at a later date. You can also add a comment to the record recommending the use of 'vmf' over 'sxu' for this dialect. However, a prefix can never be wholly removed, as Doug notes.


Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list