Proposed new variant subtag: pre1917
yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Sun Sep 12 09:10:33 CEST 2010
On 09/11/2010 10:38 PM, CE Whitehead wrote:
>> So you have Peter 1708, something 1750, and something with more disused
>> letters, in addition to modern post-1917 orthography. So you need three
> I also agree with Doug's post that a year is not a particularly good identifier for a variant.
> One question: are there are sufficient differences in all three orthographies to warrant three subtags
> (of course even a trivial difference can be catalogued with a variant subtag, if that is what you need). If so, then one subtag, maybe [pre1917] would do.
So make the subtags referring to the number of
letters in those alphabet variants. E.g.,
[cyr44let] or something like that.
Seems like a safe choice for the pre-1917 Cyrillic.
More information about the Ietf-languages