Re: Khmer orthographic reform
Élie Roux <[email protected]> Fri, 1 Nov 2019 10:00:25 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.languages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CANfi1JhMoxP3JyUS76GzNA-p7Atg92mGysp-_2SU2AZXomsioQ@mail.gmail.com> |
Thanks for the answers! > It may not be clear that two subtags are needed, if the current > orthography is overwhelmingly dominant and can be assumed, but that > discussion can come later. Sure, I thought about just one tag for pre-reform orthography yes, it's reasonable to assume that the default would be the modern one > You'll certainly want to find a reference that explains and describes > the reform. The ones Richard supplied may help. It's not mandatory that > all contemporary writers switched to the new orthography simultaneously > or uniformly; that certainly wasn't the case for, say, '1606nict'. Ok yes, makes sense. I'll try to find a reference point; my understanding is that it will be quite arbitrary as there seems to be a continuum of reforms; and it seems not very productive to identify each one with a different tag. > The subtag values themselves probably won't be any sort of abbreviation > for "pre-20th century" or the like. Such a subtag could theoretically > apply to dozens or hundreds of languages, with a different meaning for > each; and although the Prefix field is supposed to suggest the languages > for which the subtag is considered suitable, concerns are usually voiced > that this is not sufficient to discourage inappropriate use. Oh, so it's better if it contain the name of the language? something like -kmpre20c ? Best, -- Elie