registration requests re Portuguese

Yury yury.tarasievich at
Mon Apr 13 12:37:44 CEST 2015

On 04/12/2015 04:24 PM, Doug Ewell wrote:
> Yury wrote:
>> Now, using the 'region' subtag AND ruleset ID 'variant' seems to be
>> tentative guess at best. How do you 'place' the text, anyway? By
> It is never appropriate to apply a region subtag based on guesswork, or

>> pt-AO-ao1990
>> doesn't make sense, somewhat. There are no definable (pinpointable)
>> things like pt-AO-ao1990. If there were a ruleset translation or
>> harmonisation in AO, then there would be things like pt-ao1990ao or
>> similar.
> John Cowan already wrote, "there are differences between national
> versions of Portuguese that are not orthographic: grammar, vocabulary,
> and the forms of the second person pronoun, for example."
> Now, given that, are you saying that there could not be distinct samples
> of those different national varieties of Portuguese that also exhibit
> the characteristics of AO1990 orthography, as distinct from other
> orthographies?

I'm saying one won't be able to know about them (and so, tag them) until 
somebody does the generalisation and the related (publishing) artifact 
comes up. The book, the ruleset, etc.

The folks of AO may do all varieties of ao1990, but until somebody goes 
and, say, publishes a paper on what do folks of a certain AO region do 
with ao1990, there'd rather be no (conjectural) tag. Then, and only 
then, would the 'region' or, rather, another 'variant' element be 

Not lang+region, however. The lang+region combination is just a relic of 
olden informatics days.


More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list