Variant subtag proposal: Hgnorsk variety of Norwegian

Doug Ewell doug at
Tue Dec 29 05:20:46 CET 2009

Kent Karlsson <kent dot karlsson14 at comhem dot se> wrote:

> Anyway, I think it would be a bad idea to encourage using 
> "no-hognorsk". It is still permitted (since the "prefix" data is just 
> a recommendation). But I see no reason to use that tag. All data that 
> get (re)tagged (assuming that it has been determined to be/contain 
> Hgnorsk text) to use the 'hognorsk' variant should use the tag 
> 'nn-hognorsk', even if the original tag (if any) was 'no'.

OK, that was the answer I was looking for.

I found it interesting, though, that my question revealed that some 
people believe Norwegian data should be only tagged as 'nb' or 'nn', 
never as 'no', despite the huge amount of existing 'no' data.

Doug Ewell  |  Thornton, Colorado, USA  |
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14  |  ietf-languages @ ­

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list