IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf-languages] Fwd: Recommendation not to register variant subtags of the form 0nnn

Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org> Wed, 29 July 2020 20:57 UTC

Return-Path: <doug@ewellic.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854013A0DC6 for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 13:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.804
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.804 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9wtV_g3S4ByJ for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 13:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DDEF3A0DC5 for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 13:57:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) id F16277C5B65; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:57:20 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
X-Comment: SPF skipped for whitelisted relay - client-ip=192.0.46.73; helo=pechora3.dc.icann.org; envelope-from=doug@ewellic.org; receiver=ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from pechora3.dc.icann.org (pechora3.icann.org [192.0.46.73]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD5CC7C5B64 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:57:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from p3plsmtpa06-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa06-09.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pechora3.dc.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A18FF7003173 for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 20:57:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from DESKTOPLPOB1E4 ([73.229.14.229]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPSA id 0t8Ekn7080tOs0t8Ekquhc; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 13:56:59 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=NuyvjPVJ c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=9XGd8Ajh92evfb2NHZFWmw==:117 a=9XGd8Ajh92evfb2NHZFWmw==:17 a=DAwyPP_o2Byb1YXLmDAA:9 a=nORFd0-XAAAA:8 a=OnD8wFS_x-vtWKTNd0AA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=RHWZV63T8jUh0kZOcRYA:9 a=IFO24gVIXBkyyfb3:21 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=AYkXoqVYie-NGRFAsbO8:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: doug@ewellic.org
From: Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
To: 'John Cowan' <cowan@ccil.org>, 'IETF Languages Discussion' <ietf-languages@iana.org>
References: <a66144d8bae24114a1b1e64144ca1088@EX13D08UWB002.ant.amazon.com> <CAD2gp_Thc3pNicD-2+bMmaaBZPaLiyQzvVrPK+C+Y9NNCiBwCA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD2gp_QeVRfvKVUr9a5avwzZS=EV0rri9Yvx0wcQzt1TaV7QFQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD2gp_QeVRfvKVUr9a5avwzZS=EV0rri9Yvx0wcQzt1TaV7QFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 14:56:58 -0600
Message-ID: <000901d665ea$cd03a890$670af9b0$@ewellic.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01D665B8.826BA990"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQKFe8CU55eGmP+4L5KPaDuatdEV1AGWLOb0Aa0bVSSnpsAJEA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfMaJ7fyLJNvrVMtiO6tzFF0BLrE0XkFrZNYo+3xzOKd1VRUedcH9VPUOeOA+6nFLPlWgsA690Sg2S7x6ttULR6Xr6BqW/Znvy8wUo858KwPBrP4bv45S PKcNk2UYQJW+K7g0kvfdcknc/GbF20KKzWAnsonY+J1zRpzvD3N5M4/fqbU3mR1fhpy2p4XqNmcQFPEETeNX3fZIOLYJqqGCUfs=
X-Greylist: Sender DNS name whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (pechora3.dc.icann.org [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 29 Jul 2020 20:57:19 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/OEntxy3FtGjQ3Xc0j1-gllFCzgY>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] Fwd: Recommendation not to register variant subtags of the form 0nnn
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-languages.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-languages/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 20:57:25 -0000

I understand the intent, although there are plenty of opportunities already for confusion.

 �

I have a colleague who often refers to the bogus tag ”en-EN” by analogy with “fr-FR” and “es-ES” and “it-IT”. (The organization doesn’t fully get that region subtags aren’t always necessary or desirable.)

 �

Our existing UN M49-based region subtags that begin with “0” are already subject to this. One of them, “en-029”, even has some currency. I don’t know if there has been any confusion around the leading zero. I know from a quick web scan that there is plenty of confusion from people who think a region subtag can only be an ISO 3166-1 code element, or who are still stuck in RFC 1766 and think a language subtag can only be two letters.

 �

I appreciate the nemawashi and suggest that we try to not enact any firm decisions, but keep this idea in mind whenever an all-numeric variant subtag is being floated.

 �

--

Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org

 �

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email