Re: [Ietf-languages] subtag kmpre20c

Élie Roux <elie.roux@telecom-bretagne.eu> Sat, 09 November 2019 23:46 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 B325512018B for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 15:46:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.283
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.283 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham 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 a3C9m2mmyJ8X for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 15:46:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62FFE120025 for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 15:46:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) id 02E0F7C4AEC; Sun, 10 Nov 2019 00:37:03 +0100 (CET)
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id D21127C4A7D for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sun, 10 Nov 2019 00:37:02 +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 1mJjkQzvzhnB for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sun, 10 Nov 2019 00:36:58 +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=192.0.46.72; helo=pechora6.dc.icann.org; envelope-from=roux.elie@gmail.com; receiver=ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from pechora6.dc.icann.org (pechora6.icann.org [192.0.46.72]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68CD57C4A58 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Sun, 10 Nov 2019 00:36:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-il1-f177.google.com (mail-il1-f177.google.com [209.85.166.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pechora6.dc.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BA4E1E0044 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Sat, 9 Nov 2019 23:36:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-il1-f177.google.com with SMTP id p6so8476991ilp.1 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 15:36:57 -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; bh=YW2MXxWsfXGDK5BajeVMe2rw9+UMbE973m43EDcr+Zw=; b=fEycyLnTWo9J4gKmhWW0i+x4mvosIwEwJRVi6KSDrKnml2a9gapZ5NglHvnr3oP/wS L6it3io6ZfboN1qEt4YcbGUNdMS9B3ina8TS9+6ss3zc5dDT2/XMWgKTWiYCop+ZRl/k +O70cBW6PgtbKAuUz6JIYkQFatnT/oTU0/pYXN6SSpFC1mr54TLM7svtAsAC8Q81Vgn1 QJLmXOzh7JGAiaDA9j8GSnMiTfyeH0E+CuRNYg70tZiM15ujWNvAr5y6pjECJ8Savdb1 credh4jK3K0p1QqXjehHmQT1VLGs+Muxv9Jf8WDLUiY5ovg0gF/jBDbiCLbFAc4Hkc5I 4jHQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXNETr+vJobiKRYxCt644Oh+r9tcaXyOp1785CzhH7iSGdokqqU CTc4AOq04I5u3qrHOrGiXdBbmppuISbGA7SvILFjMddUAOU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqysbl+NlAlVFgG9xC6Xs57/Qp2++gGG4pt953AmArcqanFDldoq9j89Ti6eJw/f8FwGvI2VbuxrKOCEegdIa5M=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:8ccc:: with SMTP id s73mr22078929ill.86.1573342597313; Sat, 09 Nov 2019 15:36:37 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANfi1JhY=q86ojo2ea+zQ06peY24UoF-98Jc0KUmfCoGcPq6cg@mail.gmail.com> <MW2PR2101MB10656FF1549BC7E74EB6110AD57A0@MW2PR2101MB1065.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MW2PR2101MB10656FF1549BC7E74EB6110AD57A0@MW2PR2101MB1065.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=89lie_Roux?= <elie.roux@telecom-bretagne.eu>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2019 00:36:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CANfi1JiGpz=XhisRRjcV02TD-+d_fQbrsZZMcjWwrOFp3AH5uA@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF Languages Discussion <ietf-languages@iana.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/oUixX1FrgZEwzalUXdWOiuwtaZs>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] 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, 09 Nov 2019 23:46:13 -0000

> Typo: "speicific".

Thanks!

> This isn't clear to me. Is this meant to apply to texts that pre-dated _any_ of the XXth c. reforms?

Yes

> What if the text reflects some earlier XXth c. reform but not later reforms?

Then this tag should not be applied. Note that the early XXth c.
reform is the current official spelling (later spelling reforms have
been used and then abandonned)

> Is there a need to distinguish texts that may reflect transitional XXth c. stages from current orthographic convention or a current standard reference?

Not in the dataset I need to tag. The need may certainly arise in
other contexts and I'd support any initiative for tags differentiating
the two main types of spellings of the XXth c. reforms.

> Also, literature from earlier periods of a language's history may reflect greater variety / less conventionality in spelling practice. If that is true for earlier Khmer literature, is this meant to encompass any earlier texts?

Yes

Best,
-- 
Elie