Re: [Ltru] Possibly a way forward? (was extlang & deprecation (wasdraft updated...))

["Doug Ewell" <doug at ewellic.org>]

For the record, either the X-Y or Y form is acceptable to me.  I'm not 
planning any late surprises.

I would like to see X-Y be allowed *somehow*, even if it is deprecated 
so strongly that I have to register with the police AND all the 
neighborhood kids will make fun of me if I use it.  But even if the WG 
decides it must be only Y (which I don't think will happen), I will go 
along with it.

The worst thing of all is to continue this delay indefinitely so that 
these 7,200 additional languages cannot be part of an IETF language tag 
at all.  Talk about a denial of service.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Arvada, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://www.ewellic.org
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages  ˆ


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Phillips, Addison
To: Mark Davis ; Doug Ewell
Cc: LTRU Working Group
Sent: Monday, July 7, 2008 23:33
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Possibly a way forward? (was extlang & deprecation 
(wasdraft updated...))


I think this is misguided. The problem here that we seem to be 
struggling with is that we don’t wish to insinuate that one form or the 
other is “better” because we cannot agree amongst ourselves which form 
is better… or we fear that some nameless parties will object later (why 
they don’t object now I don’t understand---it’s a kind of DoS attack on 
the WG not to say what one prefers now).

I cannot understand how a subtag can have a “preferred value” (implying 
that it is at least “not preferred”) and not say that it is deprecated. 
Deprecation is not the end of the world for a subtag. If what we’re 
saying is that deprecation of (either) one of the forms is a 
non-starter, then let’s go with:

1.       There are two forms Y and X-Y.
2.       Neither form is preferred and neither form is deprecated. 
Either MAY be used to form the language tag.
3.       Choosing one form or the other has implications, especially for 
naïve matching algorithms (list these implications where known)

That strikes me as a workable compromise if we cannot agree to deprecate 
one form or the other. Implementations are still free to choose one form 
over the other and still free to “normalize” tags to that form for 
processing.

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.

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