Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian

Kent Karlsson kent.karlsson14 at
Mon Dec 28 21:42:01 CET 2009

I agree with Thorgeir on the analogies issue. But that also makes me
wonder if there should be a variant subtag to mark now-official
nynorsk orthography. "nn" alone could be used for either orthography,
even though one would expect the majority of documents language
tagged "nn" to be in the now-official nynorsk orthography.

    /kent k

Den 2009-12-28 15.44, skrev "Thorgeir Holm" <thorgeirholm at>:

> <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.

> nguages mailing 
> list
Ietf-languages at
> tf-languages

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list