Phillips, Addison scripsit: > My real concerns are: > > - adding subtags when canonicalizing is counter-intuitive (I would expect the canonical tag to be more compact). Whereas I take "cmn" to be an abbreviation for "zh-cmn" that provides more convenient processing in certain scenarios. > - some legacy systems (CLDR, for example) have inherent > structural/design reliance on the language portion being somewhat atomic Then let them use the non-canonical form, as Google uses non-canonical 'iw' with no intention of changing. > - the Lookup algorithm (i.e. locale-style negotiation) seems to be > adversely affected by extlangs. Lookup produces better results when > the language and extlang are "atomic". Having a canonical mapping to a > primary subtag makes exactly that distinction. If I'm using Lookup, all > I have to do is canonicalize the tags and then run lookup normally. The > other way I have to change code (and would probably push hard for a > 4647bis as a result). You just need something different from canonicalization as currently written. I admit I am splitting hairs here. I continue to think local filtering per RFC 2616 the most important use case, more important than either mass filtering a la search engine or resource lookup. -- Where the wombat has walked, John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> it will inevitably walk again. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan _______________________________________________ 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.