Re: [Ietf-languages] Adding prefixes with dialect variants to Occitan orthographic variants

[John Cowan <[e-mail]>]

>From what I understand, the classical orthography is suitable (or
unsuitable) for any dialect, the Mistralian orthography for Provencal only,
and the Italian orthography for Aranese only.

What concerns me now is which order the tags should go in.  The BCP 47
principle is that tags that create a greater barrier to mutual
intelligibility should come first.  But I am not sure if it is easier to
read text in the "wrong" orthography or in the "wrong" dialect from what
you are most familiar with.  That is a question for an Occitan-speaker or a
Occitanist.



On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 8:55 PM Doug Ewell <[e-mail]> wrote:

The logical choice of tag would seem to be "oc-gascon-grmistr". However,
> all 13 of the variant subtags for Occitan -- those for dialects as well as
> those for orthographies -- have only one Prefix value:
>
> Prefix: oc
>
> That means, while it is technically permissible to create the tag
> "oc-gascon-grmistr" (just as any combination of discrete variant subtags is
> technically permissible), BCP 47 does not recommend it, and tools that
> create or validate tags will usually flag such a tag with a warning.
>
> The approach recommended in BCP 47, and the one we actually use in
> practice, is to add additional Prefix values:
>
> Prefix: oc
> Prefix: oc-gascon
> Prefix: oc-nicard
> Prefix: oc-provenc
> etc.
>
> This has the added advantage of indicating the recommended order of
> variants, so that one will be encouraged to write, for example,
> "oc-gascon-grmistr" and not "oc -grmistr-gascon".
>
> I'd like to get a feel for the Registrar's and other list members'
> inclination toward augmenting the Occitan orthographic variant subtags by
> adding Prefix values that include some or all of the dialect variants, as
> illustrated above. I've also cc'd stakeholders on this message, the
> requester, David Mediavilla, as well as Lo Congrès Permanent de la Langue
> Occitane and its representative who originally proposed the 13 variants in
> 2018.
>
> If it is not expected that all combinations of 10 dialect variants and 3
> orthographic variants might reasonably be used together, then we would need
> a list of which combinations do need to be added.
>
> If we do not decide to add these Prefix values, then we should probably
> provide some sort of advice to the stakeholders how they should tag such a
> combination, in light of what BCP 47 says.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>