Revised records and registration forms for Portuguese variants

Doug Ewell doug at
Sat Mar 28 18:24:32 CET 2015

Kent Karlsson wrote:

> This tries to achieve what I suggested, but does *not* achieve it,
> since "Prefix" is used the mechanism.

I continue to disagree fundamentally with Kent's premise that "AO1990 as 
implemented in Portugal" and "AO1990 as implemented in Brazil" are so 
different that they should require separate variant subtags.

We have 'pinyin' with two prefixes, "zh-Latn" and "bo-Latn", and I think 
it would be really hard to argue that the differences between Chinese 
Pinyin and Tibetan Pinyin are less far-reaching than what we are 
debating here.

Doug Ewell | | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸 

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list