Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian
kent.karlsson14 at comhem.se
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.
Den 2009-12-28 15.44, skrev "Thorgeir Holm" <thorgeirholm at yahoo.no>:
> <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
> 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
'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
> nguages mailing
Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
More information about the Ietf-languages