Variant subtag proposal: ALA-LC romanization of Russian

[Mark Davis ☕]

I agree with John's analysis, and the conclusion that we shouldn't have
prefixes in cases like this.

Mark


On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:38, John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> wrote:

> Michael Everson scripsit:
>
> > It would be easy enough to specify the range of use for alalc97 now.
>
> In fact it is not.  My quick count found 120 languages, but the
> introduction says "more than 150 languages".  In addition, there are many
> romanizations specific to particular orthographies (mentioned by date)
> or dialects (mentioned by name), so a correct and complete list would
> require many variants to be registered as well.
>
> It's important to note that prefixes are only recommendations.  Having an
> exhaustive list of 120 or 160 prefixes does not make nonsensical tags
> like en-alalc97 invalid.  In practice, people will tag documents already
> known to be in an ALA/LC romanization using this subtag, and will not
> apply it to other documents in random romanizations.  So I recommend an
> empty Prefix: field.
>
> > Then we specify the range of use for alalc97 now, and explicitly omit
> > Japanese since it is already covered.
>
> I'd rather deprecate "heploc" in this case, since it is specific to
> the LoC.
>
> > Then alalc09 is only registered for use with the changed (or new)
> > languages.
>
> I agree.  At present these are Chinese (like pinyin but without tone
> marks), Kurdish, Ladino, Inuktitut (not in '97), Korean, ancient
> Greek, and modern Greek (there was a unified Greek table in '97).
> See http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/roman.html , from which all current
> tables ('97 and later) can be downloaded.
>
> --
> John Cowan    cowan at ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan<http://ccil.org/%7Ecowan>
> Rather than making ill-conceived suggestions for improvement based on
> uninformed guesses about established conventions in a field of study with
> which familiarity is limited, it is sometimes better to stick to merely
> observing the usage and listening to the explanations offered, inserting
> only questions as needed to fill in gaps in understanding. --Peter
> Constable
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/attachments/20091118/47c2c4e8/attachment.htm