registration requests re Portuguese
yury.tarasievich at gmail.com
Tue Apr 14 01:39:22 CEST 2015
On 04/13/2015 01:49 PM, Doug Ewell wrote:
> Yury wrote:
>>> 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.
> In other words, in order to tag content, one must know the proper way to
> tag the content.
Not quite. In order to tag, one has to have a reference point. Once
there is a reference point (book etc.), the country becomes redundant.
Or does it?
> As I understand it, this is the basis for the argument that all of the
> proposed subtags should have "pt" as their Prefix, and none should be
> further broken out into separate subtags as to "Orthography as used in
> Country Y."
I address this, however pertinently, below.
> For some languages, there are noticeable differences in usage (spelling,
> pronunciation, lexicon, grammar, etc.) that are best described as being
> characteristic of one region or another. Any English speaker will agree
> there are differences between "American English" and "British English,"
So you have fuzzily defined categories, like those you mention,
generalising the localised practice, for which and for which only
lang_REGION are of use, and you have precisely defined categories, which
do not need REGION, and which are trans-border, indeed.
> None of this has anything to do with currency signs, thousands
> separators, date formats, and the like.
Yes. That's why I drew the line between culture and strict language
More information about the Ietf-languages