Re: [apps-discuss] Internationalization Terminlogy
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 20 May 2011 15:59 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD3F4E071C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uksl6m950Hww for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB21FE0710 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 May 2011 08:59:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1QNS6x-0004YJ-Dx; Fri, 20 May 2011 11:59:39 -0400
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:59:30 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: "J-F C. Morfin" <jfc@morfin.org>
Message-ID: <1D8C60E204C582795721FBE7@PST.JCK.COM>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Internationalization Terminlogy
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:59:41 -0000
--On Monday, May 16, 2011 01:27 +0200 "J-F C. Morfin" <jfc@morfin.org> wrote: > John, > Good work. I have just searched the text for some words. Thanks. And thanks for the review. Some of the omissions that you note below are deliberate, so let me comment on those at least. > I note that: > > - "globalization" is missing which is embarrassing as Unicode > uses to say (if I am correct) globalization = > internationalization + localization + language tagging. As we have explained to others (mostly off-list), our criterion, as indicated by the title, is terms used, and found useful, in the IETF. The definition or use of a term in Unicode (or elsewhere) does not justify inclusion. When we've concluded that a term should be included, we have tried to either make our definition consistent with the definition elsewhere (often by copying) or we have tried to comment on the differences between IETF usage and usage elsewhere along with any issues those differences raise. As I am sure you know, "globalization" is used heavily in international political and economic contexts with meanings quite different from the one you describe above. Inconsistent definitions of a term are probably a good reason to avoid recommending it. The term is not, as far as I know, used significantly in the IETF. And, as far as I can tell after a quick inspection, Unicode does not, in fact, define it (it at least doesn't appear in their index, which I've found to be pretty good). Any of "no use in the IETF", "ambiguity of meaning", and "no strong requirement in the IETF" would be grounds for excluding it; all three seem to apply in this case. > - "langtag" term is missing, so is their IANA table (largest > by far IANA file). RFC 5646 is named. RFC 4647 is quoted, but > not explained, so "language filtering" is not alluded to. I've done a quick search, and I don't see "langtag" as a common term in the IETF. "Language tag" is usually spelled out instead. As with our decision to send readers directly to RFC 5890 for IDNA terminology, I think that anyone who really needs to understand the terminology for language tagging and associated issues and actions is better off looking at the relevant documents (which are referenced for a reason). If you have suggested text for clarifying that, or a good selection of counterexamples in which "langtag" is used in IETF documents, please send them along. > - "linguistic diversity" is missing. Not an IETF word but the > IETF targets its support? It seems to me that this is a term about which many people have good (but not necessarily consistent) intuitions but for which there is no generally-accepted definition that would stand any sort of precise test. How would you recommend defining it using plain English? > - "majuscules" are named, but uncorrectly explained: in latin > languages, at least, an upper case may be a majuscule, but a > majuscule may not be printed as an upper case, or stays a > majuscule even if incorrectly printed as a lower case. The definition given is attributed to Unicode and accurately copied. It is certainly a correct definition in a typography context and probably a correct one in character set coding or internationalization ones. It seems to me that what you are after is a definition appropriate to some localization contexts. That has, so far, been out of the scope of this document (although certainly within scope of some of your other work). I'd rather keep it out of scope for this document, if only because I think the definition you propose would be very controversial, even for Latin-based writing systems in general. > - "plurilingual" is not quoted which is different from > multilingual? > - "linguistic independence" is not alluded to - ex. using > digital codes. > - "orthotypograpy" is missing in IETF As far as I know, neither of those two terms have been used in any IETF document or discussion except by you and your group(s). best, john
- Re: [apps-discuss] Internationalization Terminlogy J-F C. Morfin
- Re: [apps-discuss] Internationalization Terminlogy John C Klensin