Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian

Thorgeir Holm thorgeirholm at
Mon Dec 28 15:44:58 CET 2009

<hermer Yury Tarasievich frå 28.12.2009 13:54>

> Hey, I don't even begin to understand two things 
> about this "Norwegian riddle", but I suppose so 
> do you, guys, about the Belarusian issue. If you 
> would just keep such analogies out of this?

Analogies are useful because similar cases should be handled similarly. 
Of course, they should not be generalized too far, but this remains:

'be-tarask' is more close to pre-1933 official 'be' than now-official 
'be' ('be-1959acad').

'nn-hognorsk' (proposed) is more close to pre-1938 official 'nn' than 
now-official 'nn' (default).

To the issue raised by Michael Everson and myself, what to do with the 
classification of pre-1938 'nn', any similar policy as to the 
classification of pre-1933 'be' would thus be informative.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list