doug at ewellic.org
Sat Feb 27 18:51:59 CET 2016
Michael Everson wrote:
> Well, then, you’ve got a problem. Either a text is defined by being a
> linguistic entity, or it’s defined by the date it was written.
Variant subtags identify a linguistic variety, regardless of the actual
surroundings in which the content was created.
I speak en-US, so if I travel to the UK or Germany and speak as I
normally do, I would still be speaking en-US. I would not suddenly be
speaking en-GB or en-DE.
Similarly (I hope), if 'classlat' is defined to represent some variety
of Latin and 'neolat' another, and someone writes a Latin text today
using the "classical" conventions, that text should not be called
'neolat' simply because of when it was written.
> I’m not convinced yet that this is going in the right direction. How
> will la-GB-neolat differ from la-SE-neolat?
How does la-GB differ from la-SE in the first place?
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸
More information about the Ietf-languages