Hi - As a technical contributor... > From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com> > To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org> > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 12:38 PM > Subject: [Ltru] a modest proposal... > > Since: > > 1. We appear to be stuck. > 2. We (most of us, anyway) would like to see this work completed. > 3. We haven't a compelling-enough technical argument that resolves the issue. > > I would like to submit a "modest proposal" for addressing the impasse: > > 1. Restore a *single* extlang to the ABNF. > 2. Keep the Macrolanguage field in the registry for all encompassed > languages, which information may be use by implementations however makes the most sense. > 3. Cherry pick *only* the 'zh' (and possibly the 'ar') encompassed > languages for registration as extlangs. This is done in the name of > compatibility alone. So far, this seems very reasonable. > 4. Permit implementations to treat the 'language' > production as atomic (that is, the sequence "zh-yue" MAY be treated as > if it were a single subtag but MAY be treated as separate subtags, > notably by existing implementations). Note that the 'language' production > is the one that includes both the primary and extended language subtags. I'd rather not put this in 4646bis. If it's necessary to talk about this kind of thing at all, it would belong in an update to the matching RFC. Randy _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru at ietf.org https://www.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.