Registration request for new subtags for Portuguese orthographies

Luc Pardon lucp at
Thu Mar 26 12:08:07 CET 2015

> I don’t want to revisit this later. I want you professionals to grasp the nettle and respond to my request: How are you going to enable a user in BR or a user in PT to indicate what variants of ao1990 they want? 

  I am not a professional linguist, but even as a professional
technician I don't see why one particular spelling subtag should define
everything down to the last word. To me, it is enough that it identifies
a particular dictionary (which ao1990 does).

  In any case, if you see this as a problem, how exactly are you going
to solve it by requiring users of ao1990 to tag with plain pt instead of
pt-ao1990 ?

  To you, "plain pt" seems to mean "Portuguese written in any spelling".
Fair enough, but if you define it that way, it includes all spellings
that have been used by all writers since the 12th century or so. Given
that (especially in those early days) everybody probably wrote as they
saw fit, this is quite a big bag.

  If you say that ao1990 includes all of that as well, then yes, you are
right that there is no need for a separate tag.

  However, as I understand it, this is not the case. So even though
ao1990 may be too big a bag to your taste, it still is a much smaller
subset than plain pt, and rather well-delimited at that. Therefore it
does merit a separate subtag.

  Luc Pardon

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list