[LUGOS-SLO] Code for Bohorič alphabet?

[Tomaz Erjavec]

Zdravo Mojca,
ne bi mogla lepše napisat, v resnici skoraj identično kot je napisal tudi Doug Ewell, njegov mail na dnu tega.
Torej, ja, predlagamo 3 nove variante slovenščine.
Spodaj moji predlogi, v tako ljubih mi TLAjih, pa naj kdo sporoči če ima kaj proti, sicer pa to pošljem na IANA.
lp, 
Tomaž

Type: variant
Subtag: boh
Description:  The Bohorič alphabet for Slovene
Prefix: sl
Comments: The Bohorič alphabet (Slovene: bohoričica) was an orthography used for Slovene between the 16th and 19th centuries. Its name is derived from Adam Bohorič, who codified the alphabet in his book Articae Horulae Succisivae, published in 1584.
%%
Type: variant
Subtag: dan
Description: The Dajnko alphabet for Slovene
Prefix: sl
Comments: The Dajnko alphabet for Slovene (Slovene: dajnčica) was a Slovene writing system invented by Peter Dajnko. It was used in from 1824 to 1839 mostly in Styria (in what is now eastern Slovenia).
%%
Type: variant
Subtag: met
Description: The Metelko alphabet for Slovene
Prefix: sl
Comments: The Metelko alphabet (Slovene: metelčica) was a Slovene writing system developed by Franc Serafin Metelko. It was used by a small group of authors from 1825 to 1833 but it was never generally accepted.
%%

Pri tem še ugotavljam, da je slovenščina v http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry definirana kot:
%%
Type: language
Subtag: sl
Description: Slovenian
Added: 2005-10-16
Suppress-Script: Latn

Po moje bi bilo dobro dodati še en 
Description: Slovene

lp,
Tomaž

-----Original Message-----
From: lugos-slo-bounces+tomaz.erjavec=ijs.si at lugos.si [mailto:lugos-slo-bounces+tomaz.erjavec=ijs.si at lugos.si] On Behalf Of Mojca Miklavec
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 12:47 AM
To: Linux in slovenjenje
Subject: Re: [LUGOS-SLO] Code for Bohorič alphabet?

2012/4/14 Martin Srebotnjak wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I guess it is just that the ISO-15924 standard should be officially
> extended with the "Boho" code.

(Glede na to, da ne odgovarjam na angleške liste, bom pisala kar v slovenščini.)

Kljub temu, da razumem, zakaj bi bilo za jezikoslovce to zelo
koristno, se mi zdi nova oznaka za "Script" (ISO-15924) enaka
perverzija, kot če bi Nemci zahtevali svojo oznako Deut namesto Latn,
ker v Nemčiji (za razliko od Švicarjev) pišejo ß namesto ss.
Nenazadnje bi lahko registrirali tudi gajico, pa potem argumentirali
še, da Slovenci potrebujemo še dodatno štiričrkovno kodo, ker je naša
abeceda le podmnožica gajice. V standardu sicer obstaja nekaj podvrst
latinice (Fraktur, Gaelic).

Niti Grki nimajo dveh oznak za monotonično in politonično verzijo
zapisa. V "IANA Language Subtag Registry" se uporablja el-polyton in
el-monoton.

Tisto, kar bi zares pomagalo, bi bila oznaka tipa "Latn-Boho",
"Latn-Metl", "Latn-Gajc", ... vendar IANA v svojem registru ne
predvideva vartiant zapisa (Script), temveč le variante jezika.

Slovenci so npr. že zaprosili za standardizacijo oznake tipa
"sl-rozaj-njiva-1994":
- rozaj: Resian
- njiva: The Njiva dialect of Resian (The dialect of Gniva/Njiva is
one of the four major local dialects of Resian)
- 1994: Standardized Resian orthography

kar namiguje na to, da ne bi smela biti težava registrirati nove
značke, le da se strinjam s Tomažem, da bohoričica ni ravno varianta
jezika, pač pa varianta zapisa.

Po drugi strani bi bilo dobiti oznako "sl-bohoric" (IANA Language
Subtag Registry) bistveno lažje in hitreje od "sl-Boho" (ISO 15924).
Morda ne bi bilo povsem pravilno, bi bilo pa bolj verjetno, da bi bila
nova oznaka odobrena.

On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 19:22, Tomaz Erjavec wrote:
>
> Verjetno res ne bi bilo slabo prijavit na ISO (pa potem tudi dajnčico in metelčico), me pa kar glava zaboli, ko vidim ta njihova pravila. No, mogoče vseeno ugriznem v to kislo jabelko..

... če pa že želite kisla jabolka, predlagajte raje razširitev
standarda, da bo mogoče dodajati variante skriptam in ne le jezikom.
Če začnete z bohoričico, danjčico, metelčico, gajico, varianto za
romanizacijo makedonščine ... seznamu ne bo konca. Stavim, da ima
skoraj vsaka država po nekaj variant zapisa svojega jezika skozi
zgodovino in stlačiti vse izmed njih v vrhnji nivo (trenutno je žal en
sam) se mi zdi enako smiselno kot zaprositi za ISO 639-2 kodo za
prekmurščino.

Mojca
_______________________________________________
lugos-slo mailing list
lugos-slo at lugos.si
http://liste2.lugos.si/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lugos-slo

Hi Debbie and Tomaž,
 
I understand the confusion over the terminology used in RFC 5646, in particular the phrase “writing system variations” in Section 2.2.3.
 
As I recall, that wording was meant to explain the presence of distinct subtags for things like Old Church Slavonic (‘Cyrs’) and Fraktur and Gaelic Latin (‘Latf’ and ‘Latg’), as well as multiple subtags for Chinese (‘Hani’, ‘Hans’, ‘Hant’) and subtags for combinations of scripts used to write Japanese and Korean. These are the distinctions made in ISO 15924. In each of these cases, there are visual distinctions between the “variations,” not simply differences in the set of letters used.
 
For example, there are no separate ISO 15924 code elements or script subtags for the modern English alphabet, the modern French alphabet, the modern Italian alphabet, etc. Each of these language-specific alphabets uses a different subset of letters from the overall Latin script, but they are not different scripts.

I also understand the confusion over the description of variant subtags in RFC 5646. The focus during RFC 5646 development was certainly on using variant subtags for dialects, but over time, an equally important use for variants has turned out to be for alphabets and orthographies. It is an error to think that BCP 47 variant subtags are “only” for dialects or “only” for orthographies. They can serve many different needs.
 
Variant subtags really are the correct way to tag an orthography or a historical alphabet. By examining the existing variant subtags in the Registry, you can find many that serve a need similar to that for Bohorič :
 
‘1901’ for the German orthography before the 1996 reform
‘1996’ for the current German orthography
‘1994’ for one used for Resian, a Slovenian dialect
‘baku1926’ for a Latin-script alphabet used for multiple Soviet republics
‘hognorsk’ for a Norwegian orthography
‘kkcor’ and ‘uccor’ and ‘ucrcor’ for Cornish orthographies
‘monoton’ and ‘polyton’ for Greek with and without tone and breathing marks
‘petr1708’ and ‘luna1918’ for Russian orthographies
 
An additional point is that script subtags are strictly limited to those assigned in ISO 15924. This is analogous to the assignment of two- and three-letter language and extlang subtags (ISO 639) and region subtags (ISO 3166 and UN M.49). There is no provision to register these types of subtags outside of the standards. I can also virtually assure you that the ISO 15924 committee will not consider Bohorič a distinct script from Latin, and will not assign it a code element.
 
Let me know how I can assist, if desired, in preparing a proposal for a BCP 47 variant subtag for Bohorič, and perhaps for the other two alphabets or orthographies to which you alluded.
 
Tomaž, you asked Debbie about the IANA time frame. There is a two-week review period after proposals are posted to the ietf-languages list. Contributors may offer suggestions during this time; minor changes do not necessarily reset the clock, while major changes may do so. After the review period is over and the Reviewer submits the changes to IANA, it is usually only a matter of a few days before IANA posts the updated Registry. If you have a time constraint, you will want to submit proposals soon.
 
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell ¬