Re: [Ietf-languages] Forms for subtag kmpre20c

Élie Roux <elie.roux@telecom-bretagne.eu> Sat, 23 November 2019 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <roux.elie@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07C6120807 for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:18:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.74
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.74 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.244, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mbwa9z284Qkb for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:17:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3622212011E for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:17:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) id 448A87C48BE; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:17:56 +0100 (CET)
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 300797C4393 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:17:56 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MOhoc6VIYjth for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:17:53 +0100 (CET)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
X-Comment: SPF skipped for whitelisted relay - client-ip=192.0.33.72; helo=pechora2.lax.icann.org; envelope-from=roux.elie@gmail.com; receiver=ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from pechora2.lax.icann.org (pechora2.icann.org [192.0.33.72]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE9D17C437F for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:17:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-il1-f178.google.com (mail-il1-f178.google.com [209.85.166.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pechora2.lax.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0A351E023A for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 10:17:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-il1-f178.google.com with SMTP id r9so9720736ilq.10 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:17:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nmJVX8Bzutgo9SvkBt29zrMFlnd6w8Pyisar71woC94=; b=mcYS2ehVnwXzN/BlSUZk+t4i5yFoMpwdrWBdMJs1NGInZFm+oUcIY8AtMbO3tLODCo kpow2sBwt018/cDcaDJEblr9fjascW4grHEdTo4z07EFy0GztFs0nkvCrCiJGRfsXqAi nSQKBv63DXG7ekvLNzKweTD4VA1/iyO0d6P/PDdTH+/m6uJdGPSFAhyN5NaHE7UIL8T5 M0JuUT0Xx7y9C9ij7aPj0lSLzi5EZh7BYkfD6uBIqd3XJ1kjkIGc1ZrVczukwL0jcMEQ VffvK6ELb1Onfo/s3F3cizxjdxPE7dDTpBdPgBTNE3Ra/FkAuDmpn73B5koJAFTC90f2 sloA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXqXU6wB8GyfNy8xk0C6yh/YPpysL84dTuePDKzYGdzoBBMdIIn kFSi95gd3FjY3GNDhEJiRztamqIaWYWqbNZ92EpcwxEsO8U=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy7wZ6b8jR1iZBbD6hD6YXwIf5KAGFDSLxlIrZYPLaVIZShF660oi8bHXgetpN2aaoKzsHo4W9IlV9fBZLIv6A=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:c8e:: with SMTP id b14mr21580935ile.44.1574504246783; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 02:17:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191121141336.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.9a3859061b.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> <CANfi1JjyouJV-CLXdKOwvRxcFPM0csTe8=+44hszSBhVTxd-qA@mail.gmail.com> <CANfi1JjeSo2-Ez52Nu3Lcb3jC9skPp2_YWza8Xnusu0Xi8vHuA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANfi1JjeSo2-Ez52Nu3Lcb3jC9skPp2_YWza8Xnusu0Xi8vHuA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=89lie_Roux?= <elie.roux@telecom-bretagne.eu>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 11:17:15 +0100
Message-ID: <CANfi1JgVZ=rc1s=ELHoS=tv9HkwuzNCP0PUAZbjXWfWX0UtEXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: ietflang IETF Languages Discussion <ietf-languages@iana.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/JXbtP_U8ssbRRZ3pNasD2uEfSo8>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] Forms for subtag kmpre20c
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-languages.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-languages/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 10:18:01 -0000

Dear all,

Here's a re-submission addressing the comments (I hope).

Best,
--
Elie

===

LANGUAGE SUBTAG MODIFICATION
File-Date: 20xx-xx-xx
%%
Type: variant
Subtag: kmpre20c
Description: Pre-20th-century Khmer orthography
Added: 20xx-xx-xx
Prefix: km
Comments: Khmer spelled according to a usage that predates any
20th-century spelling reform

===

LANGUAGE SUBTAG REGISTRATION FORM
1. Name of requester: Élie Roux
2. E-mail address of requester: roux.elie@gmail.com

3. Record Requested:

Type: variant
Subtag: kmpre20c
Description: Pre-20th-century Khmer orthography
Prefix: km
Comments: Khmer spelled according to a usage that predates any
20th-century spelling reform

4. Intended meaning of the subtag:

The tag is meant to be applied to Khmer strings spelled according to a
usage predating any of the 20th century spelling reforms. This does
not correspond to a specific spelling style corresponding to a
specific historical period or geographical area. It is instead
intended to be used to contrast with spelling following any of the
spelling reforms of the 20th century.

5. Reference to published description
    of the language (book or article):

The following describes the spelling reforms of the XXth c.:

Sasagawa, Hideo. The Establishment of the National Language in
Twentieth-Century Cambodia: Debates on Orthography and Coinage.
Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, April 2015, pp. 43-72.

https://englishkyoto-seas.org/2015/04/vol-4-no-1-sasagawa/

See also:

Antelme, Michel, 2007, Inventaire provisoire des caractères et divers
signes des écritures khmères pré-modernes et modernes employés pour la
notation du khmer, du siamois, des dialectes thaïs méridionaux, du
sanskrit et du pāli, in Bulletin de l’AEFEK (Association d’échanges et
de formation pour les études khmères) n° 12

https://www.academia.edu/12004341/Inventaire_provisoire_des_caract%C3%A8res_et_divers_signes_des_%C3%A9critures_khm%C3%A8res_pr%C3%A9-modernes_et_modernes_employ%C3%A9s_pour_la_notation_du_khmer_du_siamois_des_dialectes_tha%C3%AFs_m%C3%A9ridionaux_du_sanskrit_et_du_p%C4%81li?source=swp_share

6. Any other relevant information:

Le ven. 22 nov. 2019 à 11:09, Élie Roux
<elie.roux@telecom-bretagne.eu>; a écrit :
>
> Sorry, found it in the archives:
>
> > “Predates the 20th century” should not have a hyphen.
>
> Just to be clear, the full comment has a line break, on one line it
> would have been
>
> "Khmer spelled according to a usage that predates 20th-century spelling reforms"
>
> in that case the hyphen is correct, right?
>
> > It is a little vague. No. It’s far too vague. Is this 1901-01-01? The first reform of the 20th century? The fourth? How many have there been?
>
> In my non-native English speaker mind,
>
> "predates 20th-century spelling reforms"
>
> and
>
> "predates any 20th-century spelling reform"
>
> are equivalent, but I can change it to the second form if it's
> clearer. Or maybe one of:
>
> "predates all 20th-century spelling reforms"
>
> "predates the first 20th-century spelling reform"
>
> What is the best formulation?
>
> > It should predate some particular reference, of some kind. But not “the 20th century”.
>
> I don't believe I made any reference to the 20th century in general,
> only to 20th-century spelling reforms. Sorry if I inadvertently did.
>
> > I was travelling. What’s the need for this?
>
> I have in my database a set of strings following a modern Khmer
> spelling and a set of string following pre-reform spellings, and I
> want to tag them so I can discriminate between the two, and treat them
> differently in my search index.
>
> > Did 20th-century reforms (there the hyphen is needed) all change uniformly or with some particular feature or features that make this division line make sense?
>
> There are two main reforms, one starting in 1915 and finishing in
> 1967, and one in 1972. The second one was the official spelling until
> 2009, when the official spelling became the first one. The two kind of
> spellings are very different (in short the first is based on
> etymology, the second on phonetics). The spelling that predate these
> reform (the one which I want to tag) is in turn quite distinctive and
> doesn't follow any uniform rule.
>
> The following describes the spelling reforms of the XXth c.:
>
> Sasagawa, Hideo. The Establishment of the National Language in
> Twentieth-Century Cambodia: Debates on Orthography and Coinage.
> Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, April 2015, pp. 43-72.
>
> https://englishkyoto-seas.org/2015/04/vol-4-no-1-sasagawa/
>
> See also
>
> Antelme, Michel, 2007, Inventaire provisoire des caractères et divers
> signes des écritures khmères pré-modernes et modernes employés pour la
> notation du khmer, du siamois, des dialectes thaïs méridionaux, du
> sanskrit et du pāli, in Bulletin de l’AEFEK (Association d’échanges et
> de formation pour les études khmères) n° 12
>
> https://www.academia.edu/12004341/Inventaire_provisoire_des_caract%C3%A8res_et_divers_signes_des_%C3%A9critures_khm%C3%A8res_pr%C3%A9-modernes_et_modernes_employ%C3%A9s_pour_la_notation_du_khmer_du_siamois_des_dialectes_tha%C3%AFs_m%C3%A9ridionaux_du_sanskrit_et_du_p%C4%81li?source=swp_share
>
> It is a very complex and wide topic, I'm not sure how far I should go?
> I'm ok not to be trusted, I can bring some Khmer experts in the
> discussion if needed, or maybe there are Khmer experts you want to
> consult with?
>
>
> Also, here's an attempt at a reformulation of the 4. Intended meaning
> of the subtag:
>
> The tag is meant to be applied to Khmer strings spelled according to a
> usage predating any of the 20th-centrury spelling reforms. This does
> not correspond to a specific spelling style, nor to a specific
> historical period or geographical area. It is instead intended to be
> used to contrast with spelling following one of the spelling reforms
> of the 20th century.
>
> Would that be a clearer way to express the intent?
>
> Best,
> --
> Elie



-- 
Elie