Language subtag registration for acor1990 (amended from ao1990)
doug at ewellic.org
Fri Aug 26 15:56:35 CEST 2011
"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst at it dot aoyama dot ac dot jp> wrote:
>> As for my personal opinion, "pt1971" would make it easier to find and
>> understand, *but* this ease does not make up for the (subjective)
>> "ugliness" of the subtag which comes from repeating the language code
>> as part of the subtag name. So on the balance, I - personally - would
>> disprefer "pt1971".
> Agreed, the 'pt' in the variant subtag is very ugly indeed!
I don't like the repetition of "pt-ptXXXX" either, but it does point to
Portuguese in some way (which Philip said he wanted) and it's better to
me than the equally ugly 'acor' or 'refo'.
António suggested 'aolp' for Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa,
which makes sense, but this applies only to the 1990 variant, not to the
whole plane-tiling suite of subtags that have been suggested.
We've used '1901' and '1996' for German and '1994' for the Resian
dialect of Slovenian, and the sky hasn't fallen. Maybe that is the most
sensible model to follow. If we feel we must add letters to clarify
what the year means, let's at least decide whether the letters should
precede the year (like 'alalc97' and 'baku1926' and 'luna1918' and
'petr1708') or follow it (like '1606nict' and '1694acad' and
'1959acad'), and let's stick to that one convention instead of switching
back and forth.
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14
www.ewellic.org | www.facebook.com/doug.ewell | @DougEwell
More information about the Ietf-languages