Re: [Ltru] Prefix bug

[Addison Phillips <addison at yahoo-inc.com>]

Prefixes for variants are NOT required (there is a strong SHOULD and 
multiple suggestions that a variant without a prefix is a Bad Idea). As 
Mark notes, once registered without a prefix, registering *any* prefix 
will break any and all (non-prefix-bearing) tags. However, the stability 
prohibition on narrowing the meaning would seem to be in force.

John Cowan wrote:
> #4 does not say that the modification must broaden the set of *valid*
> prefixes, simply the set of prefixes (i.e. the set of prefixes mentioned
> in the record).
>
> What *is* discrepant is that nothing in 3066bis prevents a tagger
> from using a tag like "en-1901", even though that tag is not valid.
> 2.2.5 should be modified to prevent this.

Validators should not have been required to check variant prefixes, 
given what the working group's intentions were originally. However, I 
very much like firming the registration requirements for variants (from 
SHOULD to MUST on having at least one Prefix) and leaving the validation 
rules in place.

Notice that this would effectively forbid generic variants (the reason 
for the SHOULD in the first place).

Addison

--
Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc.

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.

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