Re: [Ietf-languages] Interpreting t-h0- mechanism

"Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org> Sun, 20 October 2019 20:05 UTC

From: Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
To: cldr-users@unicode.org, ietf-languages@iana.org
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 13:58:20 -0600
Message-ID: <000a01d58780$ba8faf40$2faf0dc0$@ewellic.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AdWHgLRt4SnOs92qTamhjLgwNc9ytA==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/QFMhnHcU8-UZ-7Cg-h7N-BQXTAA>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] Interpreting t-h0- mechanism
Precedence: list

Mark Davis wrote on the CLDR list:

>> I work occasionally with documents in Eonaviego which would best be
>> coded as ast-t-gl-h0-hybrid, but then when translated to-from (which
>> there are quite a few to/from Asturian or Spanish), there would be no
>> valid encoding, so being able to represent a hybrid language as a
>> source/destination of a transform is not a pure hypothetical for me.
>
> The hybrids were originally designed for cases like Hinglish or
> Denglish, where there are large numbers of borrowings of words from a
> different language. Eonaviego sounds like set of dialects on the
> continuum between Asturian and Galician. That is, it doesn't appear to
> be Asturian with a batch of loan words from Galician.

It sounds like the best course of action might be to investigate adding a BCP 47 variant, rather than trying to shoehorn this dialectical situation into the T extension.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galician-Asturian

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org

Re: [Ietf-languages] Interpreting t-h0- mechanism Doug Ewell