Region subtags and orthographic variants (was: Re: registration requests re Portuguese)

Doug Ewell doug at
Wed Apr 15 19:41:59 CEST 2015

Peter Constable <petercon at Microsoft dot com> wrote:

> But "pt-ao1990" can be used as a reliable indicator of an orthographic
> variation in the general case β€” no region subtag required.
> [...]
> If one wants to indicate both dialectal and orthographic variations,
> then both region and variant subtags, e.g., "pt-PT-ao1990" may be
> useful.
> I get the impression that you two are in violent agreement.

Yury had written:

> When marking content ' cases where it is desirable to indicate 
> the language used in an information object' [rfc5646], specifically in 
> cases where the distinction are made per the orthography standards 
> (e.g., 'pt' case), the 'region' element is unnecessary (extraneous) 
> either in 'prefix' of this list forms or in rfc5646-conforming 
> 'langtags' themselves.

If Yury is saying that a tag for (e.g.) "Portuguese, written in the
AO1990 orthography, regional differences unspecified" needs no region
subtag, then we are indeed in agreement. There should be no region
subtag when there is no intent to tag regional language distinctions.
(In this, I disagree with Michael.)

My objections have been to the continued blanket assertions that a
region subtag is *always* "unnecessary" or "extraneous" with a variant
subtag for orthography. "pt-PT-ao1990" is the right tag if the
dialectical conventions of Portugal are also part of the equation.

Doug Ewell | | Thornton, CO πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list