[Ltru] A Modest Proposal
"Mark Davis" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com> Tue, 12 April 2005 18:28 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23042; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:28:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DLQHW-0001Nk-OY; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:38:39 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DLQ65-0001EA-N8; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:26:49 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DLQ64-0001DN-Ob for ltru@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:26:48 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22767 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:26:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DLQFY-0001IX-3Y for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:36:37 -0400
Received: from westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.12]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j3CIQP5b539454 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:26:25 -0400
Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by westrelay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j3CIQP1K243944 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:26:25 -0600
Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3CIQOPJ026819 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:26:24 -0600
Received: from markdavis (sig-9-48-117-111.mts.ibm.com [9.48.117.111]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j3CIQNPA026749 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:26:24 -0600
Message-ID: <017c01c53f8d$21e1c530$ab703009@sanjose.ibm.com>
From: Mark Davis <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:26:23 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by e34.co.us.ibm.com id j3CIQP5b539454
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 25620135586de10c627e3628c432b04a
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Ltru] A Modest Proposal
X-BeenThere: ltru@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cd26b070c2577ac175cd3a6d878c6248
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Since it is obvious that all applications in the world will require extremely fine-grained approach to languages, here is an initial proposal for development of a separate RFC to deal with them. The goal is to be able to describe the variety of speech that each person on earth may be using at a given time. Identification is by means of the location of the speaker and the time at which the speech could have occurred. The language tag is given by the following format (formal ABNF to follow). XLanguageTag ::= latitude "-" longitude "-" altitude "-" time Latitude and longitude are specified by radians, and be measured from 0 to 360 starting at the Prime Meridian going east, and from 0 to 180 starting at the South Pole and going north. The numeric values below zero are avoided because the use of the terms "positive" and "negative" when applied to location can clearly be prejudicial to many of the peoples of the world. Should in the course of the development of this RFC, the use of the Prime Meridian be viewed as representative of an English-speaking hegemony, a random longitude will be chosen as the origin. Use of latitude and longitude does not, of course, imply in any way that those who believe in a flat earth or the "four-elephant+turtle system" are in any way discouraged in the observance of their faith, nor does the use of radians in any way denigrate the goal of the Kansas State Education Board to recognize the value of π as exactly 3.0. Altitude is in meters above the center of the earth. While some may feel the likelihood of two speakers being exactly overhead is low, we do -- of course -- want to plan for all eventualities. By avoiding measurement against sea level, we again celebrate the diversity of the world's population, and do not discriminate against the proud inhabitants of Death Valley and similar locations by in any way referring to them as "negative". For location, since people rarely overlap in physical space, it will usually be sufficient to have accuracy to within 10 cm. But since fractions can be supplied, applications can have arbitrarily high degree of accuracy. The time is specified by seconds since 0000-01-00T00:00:00Z (using the proleptic Gregorian calendar as specified in XML Schema), plus an offset of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000. If finer granularity than seconds is desired, then fractions can be specified. The reason for the offset is to again avoid negative numbers, and their implied bias against historic inhabitants. The offset is chosen as to be well before all current estimates of the Big Bang. Note, however, that this in no way implies any denigration of creationism, or that believers are in any way discouraged in the observance of their faith. Nor does it imply that any one system of creationism, such as Greek or Norse creation theory, is any way inferior to any other, such as that espoused by the Kansas State Education Board. Other parts of this proposal, such as security implications, will be forthcoming. Mark _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
- Re: [Ltru] A Modest Proposal JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- [Ltru] A Modest Proposal Mark Davis
- Re: [Ltru] A Modest Proposal Tex Texin
- Re: [Ltru] A Modest Proposal Tex Texin