Status of recent proposals

Avram Lyon ajlyon at
Fri Oct 1 17:29:13 CEST 2010

Dear Doug and IETF-Languages,

2010/10/1 Doug Ewell <doug at>:
> 1. Pre- and post-1917 Russian orthography/alphabet
> Avram Lyon originally proposed a subtag on September 8 for pre-1917
> usage.  After some discussion, this was followed by a second proposal
> for a subtag to represent post-1917 usage.  The list discussed the
> meaning of the subtags (letter shapes vs. orthography) and spent a lot
> of time debating the subtag values, as well as whether the change took
> place in 1917 or 1918,  Apparently 'ru' would be the only prefix.
> Michael said "please wait" on September 15, then suggested 'petr1708'
> and 'luna1918' on September 17.  No significant objection to these
> subtag values has emerged since then, but I wasn't sure there was enough
> consensus for final forms yet, so none have been sent to the list.

I am happy with the forms as last mentioned on September 17, with the
sole prefix of "ru".

> 2. ISO 9:1995
> Avram proposed a subtag on September 14.  There was concern over the
> subtag value; the original 'iso91995' could be confusing even if
> research shows the intended ISO number to be unambiguous.  Michael
> suggested 'iscyrl95' meaning roughly "the ISO standard from 1995 for
> transliterating Cyrillic."  Yury suggested 'iso1995' which assumes that
> only one ISO standard on transliteration was published in 1995, and that
> the prefix will make it clear that Cyrillic is involved.  I don't recall
> seeing consensus on these or any other suggestions.
> Registering separate subtags for "System A" (transliteration with
> diacritics, ISO 9 and GOST 7.79) and "System B" (transcription to letter
> combinations, only in GOST) was also discussed.  This thread also seems
> to have died down without consensus.  Consequently, there are no final
> forms yet.

This died down in part because it became clear that it will be
necessary to define a GOST 7.79 System B transliteration and several
other common romanizations, and neither Yury nor I had the time to do
so at the time. Something like discussion fatigue.

I would like to push ahead with registering iso1995, making reference
to the fact that it is equivalent to GOST 7.79 System A in the
comments. Subsequent registrations of international standards for
transliteration could try to stick to this pattern, as Yury described
last month.

Hopefully I will have the stamina to find consensus this time.


Avram Lyon

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list