Re: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available

["Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn at mindspring.com>]

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

> From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison at amazon.com>
> To: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru at ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:07 AM
> Subject: [Ltru] Ticket #45: updated editor's copy available
...
>    There are two canonical forms for language tags: the 'default'
>    canonical form contains no extended language subtags, while the
>    'extlang' canonical form contains extended language subtags where
>    required.  Normally, the 'default' canonicalization is preferred.
>    However, the 'extlang' canonical form can be useful in environments
>    where the presence of the enclosing primary language subtag is
>    considered beneficial to matching or selection (see Section 4.1.2)
...

The word "required" looks a lot like the RFC 2219 keyword "REQUIRED", which
is essentially a "MUST".  Reading the proposed text in that light, the
"default" form makes no sense.

I really really really really really dislike, loathe, and abhor the very idea
of having two "canonical" forms - it seems oxymoronic.  Yes, there are
two use cases, but that does not mean that both have to be called
"canonical", or that the one true canonical form (whichever that is)
needs to serve both purposes.

Randy