registration requests re Portuguese

João Miguel Neves joao at
Sat Apr 11 01:29:17 CEST 2015

On 10/04/2015 23:20, Michael Everson wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2015, at 19:44, João Miguel Neves <joao at> wrote:
>> I don't know how this happened, but abl1943 doesn't make sense with any prefix other than pt-BR. abl1943 refers to the ortography adopted solely by Brazil between 1943 and 1971. From that point on the official language becomes pt-BR-colb1945.
> Then it should be pt-BR.
>> My recommendations for prefixes are either:
>> abl1943: pt-BR
>> colb1945: pt
>> ao1990: pt
>> Otherwise colb1945 and ao1990 should match (the reasoning being that it
>> doesn't make sense to have the ao1990 tag without the previous colb1945
>> tag). Based on Michael's list, it should be:
>> abl1943: pt-BR
>> colb1945: pt-BR, pt-CV, pt-PT
>> ao1990: pt-BR, pt-CV, pt-PT
>> pt-CV-colb1945 would mark the Portuguese ortography used officially from
>> the country formation (1975) to the adoption of 1990's "Acordo Ortográfico”.
> I don’t follow this. Not without examples of how the orthographies would differ in different places in 1945 vs 1990

Hi Michael,

Copy and pasting my previous answer to that question that was sent to
you and other participants of this list when you split the discussion
off-list, including the request if you needed more examples:

(Using tags as example, as they aren't defined yet)

Well, "batismo" is correct in pt-ao1990 and an error in pt-PT-colb1945
(where "baptismo" would be correct). As a user I would expect a
spellchecker to pick up those differences.

Note: there a lot of words in the situation António refered to, mostly
because ao1990 tries to be a step in defining a single Portuguese language
less dependent on the country. So you'll now find in pt-ao1990 words that
would be in pt-BR-colb1945 and not in pt-PT-colb1945 and vice-versa.

A few examples (I picked just one or two examples of the most visible
rules) of words that changed from pt-*-colb1945 to pt-ao1990:

Janeiro -> janeiro
Primavera -> primavera
pára -> para
péla (verb) -> pela
pêra -> pera
averigúe -> averigue
lêem -> leem
directo -> direto
ultra-ligeiro -> ultraligeiro

This are not changes where the old ortography is considered acceptable in

As an exercise, Porto Editora has a conversor to ao1990 in if you want
to check some examples.

Is this enough? Do you need anything else?


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list