[Ltru] Re: Registry in record-jar format

["Doug Ewell" <dewell at adelphia.net>]

JFC (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey at jefsey dot com> wrote:

> I extensively use my footer to evangelize about this WG's work (it
> informs people and leave them free to make their mind). I would
> appreciate (as well as anyone else maintaining a file on line of
> relevance to this work) to give the exact wording they wish I add for
> their file.

"Extensive" is the word, all right.  I have other words for it as well.

Your signature block:

* is 33 lines and almost 2000 characters long, far beyond the accepted
limits for Internet mail;

* implies that we are trying "to standardize languages and to unify the
world under a dominant culture," which is not only demonstrably
inaccurate but highly offensive as well;

* includes a Jon Postel quote, the relevance of which is puzzling at
best, since region subtags *are* based on ISO 3166 codes, at least as
much so as ccTLDs;

* includes a Brian Carpenter quote, also with dubious relevance, since
ccTLDs and regions in language tags are not "the same problem," and do
not therefore require the same solution, especially in the context of
"protocol functionality";

* makes a comparison between ISO 3166 and ISO "693" [sic] which is
puzzling and obscure even without the lingering typo.

Instead of adding even more wording, I would suggest a simple signature
block of no more than four lines (some say six is acceptable), with your
name, e-mail address, affiliation, maybe a single short quote, and
probably a link to the LTRU archive so interested people can visit,
join, and make their own judgments.  They don't need "evangelizing."

Now, back on topic.

>> (BTW, nobody has commented yet on my recipe for populating the
>> language subtags, so I assume there's nothing dreadfully wrong with
>> it.  I'll do the other sections in similar fashion, perhaps this
>> weekend.)
>
> Could you please make it a clean part that we could include in our
> Draft?

I'm working on it.  Easter weekend activities may prevent me from
posting additional installments in the next few days, but it is on its
way.

I think the current theory is indeed to put the description in the
draft, rather than relying on the pre-built registry.

> The problem as usual is the usage made of it, and the load imposed on
> IANA and private mirrors...
>
> Another point we try to consider is the developing countries and
> islands problems. ADSL US or European or Korean traffic costs nothing.
> But 600,0000 at real 500 characters per second or less is 1200
> seconds. When you know that in some countries one hour of internet
> equals one day work salary, you see the digital divide this represents
> for some of the really most involved searchers.

Happily, nobody will be required to download a fresh copy of the
registry every time they wish to read or write a language tag.  Section
4, "Security Considerations," says:

"Although the specification of valid subtags for an extension MUST be
available over the Internet, implementations SHOULD NOT mechanically
depend on it being always accessible, to prevent denial-of-service
attacks."

This applies to cost-of-access concerns as well as security concerns.

> Permitting people to exchange in different languages over real time
> information is of the essence for international assistance for
> example. So languages, terminology, etc. are an important elements.
> But at the same time we need to qualify that information, to keep it
> as dense as possible, to "culturalize it" to that end (because a DoS
> costs too much - and this is why IP is not a proper vehicle, and
> IPSec is costly). This is where you find that ISO 3166 is of
> importance but it does not address the diaspora, the immigration, de
> cultural, the corporate, the reader/viewers classes, etc. This is
> where you understand that Governments on_the_network are also
> perceived through their e-regalian embodiment of services - and
> possible interference with CRCs.

I don't see what 90% of this has to do with language tags -- surprise -- 
but I would suggest that ISO 3166-based region subtags used to indicate
"language variations used in a specific region, geographic, or political
area" apply equally well to a diaspora or to other types of immigrants.
That is, if you were a Frenchman living in Canada, your language variety
might well be "fr-FR" rather than "fr-CA", and in some cases it might be
important to tag that distinction.

Newer versions of Windows include a "region" setting in Control Panel,
distinct from the traditional "language variant/locale" setting that has
always been there.  The idea is that (assuming the above scenario) you
could set your language and other locale preferences to "French as used
in France," but still specify that you are physically in Canada for
applications where that matters.

> FYI our DIA effort will be dedicated to IEMS a small team of a WU shop
> who had started an inter-mail systems bridge. Mexico City known a big
> earth break and for hours all the international assistance
> coordination went though one of their customer's mail system to their
> ITT mailbox. No one really praised them, but many lifes and
> sufferances were spared that day because of their small async 300 bps
> service.

Their efforts are much appreciated.  Please reassure them that they will
not be required to perform a 20-minute download to tag their text.

-Doug Ewell
 Fullerton, California
 http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru