Portuguese subtags (was: RE: Ietf-languages Digest, Vol 104, Issue 15)
Francisco Miguel Valada
fmvalada at hotmail.com
Fri Sep 16 00:57:18 CEST 2011
> There are no authoritative dictionaries for the 1990 reform. No well-
> known publications.
<an online database that contains errors
and typos. Furthermore it is not a stable resource and no complete
wordlist can be extracted from it.
<I don't think there are any truly authoritative dictionaries for Scouse
<or Boontling, either.
Ok. the problem is the following:
AOLP 90 is an international treaty that foresees a Vocabulary that does not exist.
When that Vocabulary is printed, you should definitely refer to it.
Meanwhile we have no official Vocabulary, just an open platform: this means you cannot refer to it.
If a dictionary/vocabulary has a second, third and so on revised edition, you can update the reference.
If you refer to the portaldalinguaportuguesa, you will be referring to something that is neither printed, nor stable, nor scientifically recognised.
The typos to which António refers to are serious. Really.
When I use that database, in case of doubt, I double check: usually it is wrong.
<But this is starting to feel
<like an effort to use legal technicalities to reject the proposals on
<the basis of not liking the reforms. I hope I am reading the situation
Doug, António said
<There are at least two
commercially available dictionaries in print that could be used as
references, provided that the proposal mentions i) that these
dictionaries do not coincide 100%, and ii) that these dictionaries do
not fulfil the stipulation of the 1990 Treaty.
Those are printed, and I agree with his proposal.
We are not talking about the reform.
We are talking about an unreliable open database.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ietf-languages