Variant subtag proposal: Høgnorsk variety ofNorwegian

Leif Halvard Silli xn--mlform-iua at
Sun Jan 3 01:51:43 CET 2010

Randy Presuhn, Sat, 2 Jan 2010 15:52:36 -0800:

> This sounds like a quirk in the localisation of a particular
> system, rather than a question of language tagging.  It does
> not support the assertion that 'no' would be a sensible prefix
> for 'hognorsk'.

I feel that what Richard Ishida's Language Subtag Lookup [1] says about 
'no' is a good argument. That note notes the existence of precisely 
such quirks. (And it also serves as a comment to Doug, who was 
surprised to hear that one should avoid using 'no' despite its massive 

no is a macrolanguage that encompasses the following more specific 
primary language subtags: nb nn . If it doesn't break legacy usage for 
your application, you should use one of these more specific language 
subtags instead."

Unless 'nn-hognorsk' breaks my application, then 'no' isn't as sensible 
as prefix as 'nn' is. But if 'nn-hognorsk' breaks my application, then 
'no' is a sensible alternative prefix. 

(Of course, feel free to use 'gem' as prefix if that is the only thing 
that saves your day. But then we are far outside the relevant problems 
to discuss.)

For instance, I may need to discern between 'nn' and 'nn-hognorsk', but 
something breaks so it that 'nn-hognorsk' doesn't work as expected. In 
a given, practical situation, I could decide to reserve a bare naked 
'no' for Høgnorsk. So then I don't understand why one can't state that 
it then would be perfectly sane to use 'no-hognorsk' as well.

leif halvard silli

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list