Re: Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety of Norwegian

Doug Ewell doug at
Tue Dec 29 15:24:14 CET 2009

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

> 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.

Is there a genuine need to tag "official Nynorsk" (whatever that means: 
orthography, grammar, word choice, etc.) to the specific exclusion of 
Høgnorsk, or is this just tiling the plane?

To cite the analogy others have used, I seem to recall that a need was 
expressed to tag "academic Belarusian" to the exclusion of Taraskievica, 
and that this is what justified the '1959acad' subtag, not simply the 
existence of the 'tarask' subtag.

To cite a different analogy, which may or may not be appropriate, we 
have a variant for Boontling, but we do not have a variant for 
non-Boontling English, nor should we.

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

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list