Re: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

["Mark Davis" <mark.davis at icu-project.org>]

If identification is what you want, then "cmn" IS unambigously Mandarin (indeterminate script); "yue" is unambiguously Cantonese (indeterminate script); you certainly don't need extlang complicating matters.

The string "zh-yue" is really a different semantic; it is not just Cantonese, it is "Cantonese-but-fall-back-to-ambiguously-Chinese-of-indeterminate-script" in lookup (but not some other operations like RFC 4646 filtering).

And "zh-yue-Hant-MO" is "Cantonese-in-Simplified-Han-script-and-as-used-in-Macao-but-fall-back-to-ambiguously-Chinese-of-indeterminent-script", again, in lookup.

Mark

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Broome, Karen <Karen_Broome at spe.sony.com> wrote:

Why are people so afraid to restate their honest opinions on this? Why are people only voting in private? I'm getting private e-mail too.

I thought the primary goal was identification, not fallback. Without extlang, we lose some information the ISO standards otherwise contain.  I think we may be losing an oppportunity to clean up some historically muddy tags. I raise questions about identification and I am answered with arguments about fallback. I honestly fear this draft may not be an improvement for me.

Phrases like "throws in the towel," "my resistance is gone," "as neutral as I can be" ... Something does not feel good about this.


Karen Broome


________________________________________
From: ltru-bounces at ietf.org [ltru-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of tex [textexin at xencraft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:03 PM
To: ltru at ietf.org
Subject: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

Aw heck. I have been trying hard to resist engaging on this for months and months, but now my resistance is gone...



If you don't mind late votes, then put me down for:



Q1: A

Q2: C



tex





Hi -

Martin and I double-checked the tally, and it turns out that

*two* responses were sent directly to me, rather than to the ltru at ietf.org mailing list. One was sent after the deadline.

Here's the tally including those three:

Q1: A-4 B-9 C-4

Q2: A-8 B-5 C-4

Excluding those three responses, it looks like:

Q1: A-2 B-9 C-3

Q2: A-7 B-5 C-2

Either way, the support for an extlang-less approach appears to be in he distinct minority, and there appears to be a marked preference (which we'll call a *rough* consensus) for "reinstating" extlang.

Or have a bunch of people changed their minds?

Randy

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

--
Mark

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