[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Ltru] Re: RFC 4646 production "grandfathered" considered harmful



Addison Phillips wrote:

> I intend to start with the production "irregular" shown below

>>> grandfathered = irregular
>>>            / 1*3ALPHA 1*2("-" (2*8alphanum)) ; [...]

In that version s/1*3/2*3/.  If you've a good idea to split
"two parts" (the 1 in 1*2) from "three parts" (the 2 in 1*2)
please propose it.

>>> irregular = "en-GB-oed" / "i-ami" / "i-bnn" / "i-default"
>>>           / "i-enochian" / "i-hak" / "i-klingon" / "i-lux"
[...]
>>>           / "sgn-BE-fr" / "sgn-BE-nl" / "sgn-CH-de"

If i-anything clearly belongs to <irregular> I'm not thrilled
by enumerating the 13 i-anything explicitly.  10 of the 13 are
deprecated in 4645bis, only i-default, i-enochian, and i-mingo
will survive.  There's a registry with a museum for this cruft.

Talking about unnecessary details in ABNF could backfire, e.g.
if somebody decides to use i-klingon "because it's legal - as
seen in ABNF".

Unfortunately deprecating the complete zoo won't fly, i-default
is too important.  And the opposite proposal "no individually
registered language subtags, register i-anything for temporary
workarounds" was rejected.  Are you still sure that that's as
it should be ?

Frank



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at 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.