(Subject line changed since this is no longer about #45) Kent Karlsson <kent dot karlsson14 at comhem dot se> wrote:
Extension authors are strongly cautioned that many (including most well-formed) processors will be unaware of any special relationships or meaning inherent in the order of extension subtags... I did not know that we classified *processors* (of any kind) as being well-formed or not...
I am sure this is shorthand for "processors that check whether a tag is well-formed." It seems like a harmless rhetorical jump to me. In theory it could be changed to "many processors, including most that check tags for well-formedness, will be unaware" but I don't think it should be necessary to fine-tune the text to this extent.
As an aside, I believe the current text consistently uses "extended language subtag" or "extlang" to refer to one concept, and "extension" or "extension subtag" to refer to the other, so despite the potential for confusion mentioned by Karl, I don't think there is any actual ambiguity here that should affect interoperability.
-- Doug Ewell * Thornton, 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
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.