headers
Reshat Sabiq (Reşat | 2 Feb 06:32
Picon

Re: Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants


Michael Everson yazmış:
> Reshat,
> 
> Please list, exhaustively, all of the languages which use Jangalif.
> 
> Thanks.
It appears the most appropriate thing to do in terms of 1930s Latin
alphabet, is to register NTA as a variant for the following languages,
with some others possibly to be added later, as needed:
az, ba, crh, kk, krc, ky, sah, tk, tt, uz

janalif is a Tatar-language name used for Tatar-specific version of NTA
(essentially, the same set of letters as NTA, w/ one letter mapped to a
different vowel in comparison to some other Turkic languages). One could
also suggest that ba-specific version of NTA was derived from janalif
(ba was a dialect of Tatar before 1923 based on some articles). It's
possible, i suppose to register janalif as a subvariant of NTA for Tatar
(and maybe also for Bashqort (Bashkir)), but i'm not sure if that is
necessary. It may be an overkill, as it wouldn't make this much more
informative, but would just look more familiar for Tatar users.

Thanks,
Reshat.

--
My public GPG key (ID 0x262839AF) is at: http://keyserver.veridis.com:11371
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
CE Whitehead | 2 Feb 22:08
Picon

Re: Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants


>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Michael Everson yazmış:
> > Reshat,
> >
> > Please list, exhaustively, all of the languages which use Jangalif.
> >
> > Thanks.
>It appears the most appropriate thing to do in terms of 1930s Latin
>alphabet, is to register NTA as a variant for the following languages,
>with some others possibly to be added later, as needed:
>az, ba, crh, kk, krc, ky, sah, tk, tt, uz

O.k., +1 for NTA with the above prefixes (for the following languages:

Azerbaijani, Bashkir [Bashquort], Crimean Tatar, Kazakh, Karachay-Balkar, 
Kyrgyz, Yakut, Turkmen, Tatar, Uzbek)
>
>janalif is a Tatar-language name used for Tatar-specific version of NTA
>(essentially, the same set of letters as NTA, w/ one letter mapped to a
>different vowel in comparison to some other Turkic languages). One could
>also suggest that ba-specific version of NTA was derived from janalif
>(ba was a dialect of Tatar before 1923 based on some articles).

>It's
>possible, i suppose to register janalif as a subvariant of NTA for Tatar
>(and maybe also for Bashqort (Bashkir)), but i'm not sure if that is
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Doug Ewell | 4 Feb 01:04
Picon

Re: Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants

I suggest we resolve this matter as follows:

1.  Register a single variant subtag for the orthography, or family of 
orthographies, that Reşat is calling New Turkic Alphabet, for all of the 
prefixes he listed.  More can be added later if necessary, per Section 
3.1.

2.  Do NOT call this new subtag "nta".  (Variant subtags added under RFC 
4646 are canonically lowercase, though matching algorithms must be 
case-insensitive.)  The implied word "new" might unnecessarily reinforce 
the notion of this 1930s orthography as something "new," particularly in 
today's context where some former Soviet minority languages are again 
adopting (different) Latin orthographies.  Instead, call it by its Tatar 
name "janalif" unless this would be unacceptable to non-Tatar speakers.

3.  Apply whatever Description fields are deemed necessary — "New Turkic 
Alphabet", "Janalif" (or "Jaŋalif", but please not both), etc. — 
without going overboard.

4.  Register the subtag with little or no further delay, so Reşat can 
tag the content he has a legitimate desire to tag, and the list can move 
on.  Fifteen weeks is long enough.

Reshat Sabiq (Reşat) <tatar dot iqtelif dot i18n at gmail dot com> 
wrote:

> One could also suggest that ba-specific version of NTA was derived 
> from janalif (ba was a dialect of Tatar before 1923 based on some 
> articles). It's possible, i suppose to register janalif as a 
> subvariant of NTA for Tatar (and maybe also for Bashqort (Bashkir)),
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 23 comments |
headers
John Cowan | 4 Feb 04:51

ISO 3166 3-letter codes

For the record, ISO 3166/MA is no more committed to permanency
for their 3-letter codes than their 2-letter codes, and for the
same reasons.

--

-- 
Barry gules and argent of seven and six,        John Cowan
on a canton azure fifty molets of the second.   cowan <at> ccil.org
        --blazoning the U.S. flag               http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Everson | 4 Feb 11:43
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants

At 16:04 -0800 2007-02-03, Doug Ewell wrote:

>2.  Do NOT call this new subtag "nta".  (Variant subtags added under 
>RFC 4646 are canonically lowercase, though matching algorithms must 
>be case-insensitive.)  The implied word "new" might unnecessarily 
>reinforce the notion of this 1930s orthography as something "new," 
>particularly in today's context where some former Soviet minority 
>languages are again adopting (different) Latin orthographies. 
>Instead, call it by its Tatar name "janalif" unless this would be 
>unacceptable to non-Tatar speakers.

Is it the same as the pan-Turkic alphabet? Panturk would do if it is.

--

-- 
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
Permalink | Reply | 21 comments |
headers
CE Whitehead | 4 Feb 22:49
Picon

Re: Reshat Sabiq's requests for two Tatar orthographic variants


>4.  Register the subtag with little or no further delay, so Reşat can tag 
>the content he has a legitimate desire to tag, and the list can move on.  
>Fifteen weeks is long enough.

+1
>
>Reshat Sabiq (Reşat) <tatar dot iqtelif dot i18n at gmail dot com> wrote:
>
>>One could also suggest that ba-specific version of NTA was derived from 
>>janalif (ba was a dialect of Tatar before 1923 based on some articles). 
>>It's possible, i suppose to register janalif as a subvariant of NTA for 
>>Tatar (and maybe also for Bashqort (Bashkir)), but i'm not sure if that is 
>>necessary. It may be an overkill, as it wouldn't make this much more 
>>informative, but would just look more familiar for Tatar users.
>
>There's no need to register separate variant subtags to reflect slightly 
>different letter mappings used in different languages.  Certainly English, 
>French, and Spanish do not map all Latin letter exactly the same way, nor 
>do Russian and Ukrainian map all Cyrillic letters the same, yet there is no 
>perceived need to tag their writing systems differently.  The language 
>subtag should be sufficient to indicate which specific variation of 
>Jaŋalif/NTA is present.

O.k. sounds fine with me

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar <at> hotmail.com
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Stephane Bortzmeyer | 5 Feb 11:15
Picon

[Humor] 404 in many languages

Do we have a tag for each of these languages?

http://www.ibiblio.org/anythingthatyouwant
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
John Cowan | 5 Feb 15:51

Re: [Humor] 404 in many languages

Stephane Bortzmeyer scripsit:
> Do we have a tag for each of these languages?

We easily could have, if someone wanted to register the necessary
variant subtags.  There's not much we can do about the things
like BSD and Mac, though, that are semantically different.

--

-- 
Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.  Deshil Holles eamus.
Send us, bright one, light one, Horhorn, quickening, and wombfruit. (3x)
Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!  Hoopsa, boyaboy, hoopsa!
  -- Joyce, Ulysses, "Oxen of the Sun"       cowan <at> ccil.org
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Addison Phillips | 5 Feb 16:51
Picon
Favicon

Re: [Humor] 404 in many languages

Ah, but we have an out:

"This includes constructed and artificial languages, but excludes 
languages not intended primarily for human communication, such as 
programming languages."

base64, binary, C, and various cryptograms such as hacker (h4x0r) are 
covered :-).

And there are always private use subtags:

   en-x-h4x0r

Or maybe:

   und-x-h4x0r

Addison

John Cowan wrote:
> Stephane Bortzmeyer scripsit:
>> Do we have a tag for each of these languages?
> 
> We easily could have, if someone wanted to register the necessary
> variant subtags.  There's not much we can do about the things
> like BSD and Mac, though, that are semantically different.
> 

--

-- 
Addison Phillips
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Jon Hanna | 5 Feb 16:57
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [Humor] 404 in many languages

Addison Phillips wrote:
> And there are always private use subtags:
> 
>   en-x-h4x0r
> 
> Or maybe:
> 
>   und-x-h4x0r

I've noticed that Google uses the (incorrect) xx-hacker at 
http://www.google.com/intl/xx-hacker/
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane