r&d afrac wrote: > You probably know better why there is a W3C disclaimer. No, when I wrote "maybe" I was guessing, and when I said "if you're curious ask him" I meant it, literally. See <http://mid.gmane.org/42CBAAE0.3060309 at hpl.hp.com> for the complete thread, it was with the other tag: author. > I object you want to impose it to me who do not want it. If you don't like 3066bis language tags don't use them. All language tags I'm personally interested in (on my Web pages) have a Suppress-Script: Latn. From my POV nothing changes, I can even keep one en-GB-oed. Why should I join you and try to derail a draft allowing scripts for those who need it ? All problems in the old draft as far as I could identify them are fixed. I'm not at all interested in private-use language tags: Do what you like and hurt nobody. If that "restricts" you to letter-digit-hyphen and at most eight letters or digits before the next hyphen laugh about it, use UTF-8, encode it with base-64, insert hyphens, ready. "Jefsey insists on some funny private tags" would be SmVmc2V5IGluc2lzdHMgb24gc29tZSBmdW5ueSBwcml2YXRlIHRhZ3M= resulting in: x-SmVmc2V5-IGluc2lz-dHMgb24g-c29tZSBm-dW5ueSBw-cml2YXRl-IHRhZ3M Okay, case sensitive won't work, so find the RfC about base-32, or roll your own encoding scheme. If you're lost take hex. 0123456789ABCDEF and insert hyphens after eight hex. digits. If length doesn't matter percent-encode it replacing all "%" by "-". If that's not good enough for whatever you want check out Dublin Core or similar activities. > What is wrong is when the standard favors a commercial > implementation and blocks others or open source projects. The proposed standard favors KISS and compatibility with existing 3066 implementations. Apparently the latter is irrelevant for you, in that case you're free to propose whatever you like. Obviously not more related to LTRU - see the WG charter - but if you find new and interesting applications for the future registry ignoring the syntax for combined tags, just do so. After all that's exactly what we did here, combined stuff found elsewhere to 3066bis tags. You're free to use the 3066bis subtags in completely different ways. Or free to ignore them if they don't do what you want. > I wish I am sure your next free OS box is free of locale > related patented features. Software patents in our part of the world are meaningless. Has somebody really patented locales ? I hope they catch him before he hurts himself or others, he needs medical care in a closed environment. >> Of course the result will be something W3C and Unicode and >> ICU can live with, and it will be also something IMAP, MIME, >> etc. can live with. That was the purpose of this LTRU WG. > But not AFRAC? No idea, I don't know what "AFRAC" is and what it does. That doesn't mean anything, I also have no clue about IMAP, I only trust that Ira, Ned, or Bruce would tell us if we try something that won't work with IMAP. So far all you told us about "AFRAC" was that it distributes CD ROMs mirroring IANA registries, and we calculated that the maximal registry size after the addition of 7000+ languages (= 3066ter, not more 3066bis) could be about 500 KB and still fit on your CD ROM. So yes, we also considered that aspect, overall registry size. We also considered that I really hate to download big files with my V.90 line. But 500 KB is okay. And if it gets worse somebody will offer split views on the language tag registry: Maybe you or AFRAC offer a whois server, query = tag, reply = corresponding subtag entries in the complete registry. Bye _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.