Language subtag registration for acor1990 (amended from ao1990)

Michael Everson everson at
Fri Aug 26 20:50:35 CEST 2011

On 26 Aug 2011, at 19:17, António H F P A Emiliano (FCSH/UNL) wrote:

>> If it makes good sense to be able to tag the "new" orthography, it makes the same good sense to be able to tag the previous non-Brazilianized orthography.
> Right.
>> The way that we have done this before is to have a subtag defined by a reference work, to a particular specification of the orthography. Not to a governmental decree, for instance, but to a (mostly at least) complete instantiation of the orthography in question.  I don't know that we need to be able to tag every revision of the orthography, but the pre- and post-"Accord" division is a bit of a watershed.
> The pre1911 and 1911 division is actually the major watershed in PT, Michael.
> The pre1931 and 1931 division is the Brazilian counterpart. 1931 is *similar* to 1911.
>> Can António and João point to such authoritative works for each orthography?
> Sure.
> What's your take on my “systemic approach” and my request/wish for a “complete” set of subtags?
> It does stem from some of the stuff I've watched you do for Unicode.

To be honest, what I really care about in the short term is being able to distinguish the present, stable European Portuguese orthography from the new Brazilianized "accord" which may be adopted in Portugual. If that means 1911 and 1990, that's fine; compare German.

Michael Everson *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list