IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf-languages] language variant subtag "pinyin" modification request

Mark Davis ☕️ <mark@macchiato.com> Mon, 26 November 2018 07:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mark.edward.davis@gmail.com>
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 DFED7128CB7 for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 23:31:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.573
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.981, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_ABUSE_SURBL=1.25, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=macchiato-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 od0IlVDJcKf3 for <ietf-languages@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 23:31:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi1-x230.google.com (mail-oi1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B1471271FF for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 23:31:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi1-x230.google.com with SMTP id j21so14903345oii.8 for <ietf-languages@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 23:31:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=macchiato-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=I+t+S5wwwKNwUuSEjUDa30F085XAk7SBQU8tOGGGSoU=; b=y4tyW4FNr4Mff8IIuVKmC4pChxceXiT9hHqtM8GY5+XGK3t8VToNm0M1Si/cx1Lj8S 2MlgoRJO2Jg3SeEPamqISzeH9jiwPO6hquMbCRRRCdSamBtm5ac6PNdBM73x1eVajJK3 sn9aDzsgnwj9CaJtd4vx1IHsJiK0JUmUt3hhLrJoqSLM1OtDfBiCMBntCgsKFt3rSAR8 VAAhK6xMYACauDPEGW2tyqVJ3hmtuIjhN5GYyQwqHNCeLmLZf0j3ZWWaB1zYY/w3yOUM tcYHI+ElqDWvrjAKsrwZZaJNq6VqkdxFyZDzOx5c1/3TLL97cEz7cUUHBYe+uW3Y1uZA XEHQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I+t+S5wwwKNwUuSEjUDa30F085XAk7SBQU8tOGGGSoU=; b=r39+EC1lfevYYmQqupj9Vg6G1gj+npSeLwYOqXBUzW6tZC3/V5OJvm76b+DuhZHzDO +C4ykMy3LDCexDnbKMYzX/D3maIaUsz/qfkwSwVRQhvlWXvv1Jh3fQHoMSSfj5MgbvWL JH2k/dSH6qDEaNAk1uXXya3RXVJdK/KrKts5opGGpFoHcvN4RuLH4LaHcDc8AY6IJcZK xv6Jb4DMFUksuLacq9+u1IjwkeIJKbYnATgJ0BCMUQJnkw2R5azaq1XPae9oeIaid2Vh +NWWHSHPkWqzuJ8H2ur/7sRwX7TxzEcHAb75vs4vRYGvpHt/zZdTpfZ7DlL93MgJQRnE /uHQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLaWWwW+FyPuhKAMpQiuAna+u7tjBJK42gFbrM5xghmDh7TOOQt U3Unbial/i9zgQ6sLK+fufn92eCJ5y8SIm3V9vo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dmvgBDndpWWCybsqK0W66oVZ0IIhGqQMi81pRtFJf/27ue24SFa+RvvX0M8ROVYVXJIbgw8LldGr3TwvT6+E4=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:13:: with SMTP id u19mr15147351oic.57.1543217481323; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 23:31:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181120140652.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.b5a95fa5ff.wbe@email03.godaddy.com> <CAB0NEmxkmg_Sp-cZbsrUXhRsS7z+0GL01266N1HvHMSkL9SG1g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ2xs_G4c+7aCySXCPYGDd_iQ-zcB9F2NYhCabcxr75Mes9YjA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ2xs_G4c+7aCySXCPYGDd_iQ-zcB9F2NYhCabcxr75Mes9YjA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mark Davis ☕️ <mark@macchiato.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 08:31:09 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ2xs_Gz2hz=bgNTdP8J9ZM=iCF4HEpmpYYWMQLHkgdRPjD1tA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hugh Paterson <hugh_paterson@sil.org>
Cc: "Ewell, Doug" <doug@ewellic.org>, "ietf-languages@iana.org" <ietf-languages@iana.org>, gfb hjjhjh <c933103@gmail.com>, ietf-languages@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c919c6057b8c51c3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-languages/hKOF-7ulbPrLcqHO2McbhlmLJec>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-languages] language variant subtag "pinyin" modification request
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: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:31:24 -0000

See also: Locale Identifiers <https://goo.gl/kizkrm>

Mark


On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 2:17 PM Mark Davis ☕️ <mark@macchiato.com> wrote:

> The Unicode locale identifiers support a legacy syntax as well as proper
> BCP 47 syntax. There is a defined subset of the Unicode locale identifiers
> called *Unicode BCP 47 locale identifiers*, which are all well-formed BCP
> 47 language tags. That is the target syntax that any new implementation
> should use.
>
> The data files on the CLDR site use the legacy syntax for backwards
> compatibility. However, the transform to BCP 47 syntax is simple, and
> defined in
> http://unicode.org/reports/tr35/#Unicode_Locale_Identifier_CLDR_to_BCP_47,
> so it is quite straightforward for implementations to read the CLDR data
> and just use the BCP47 syntax.
>
> We should probably make that clear in the chart documentation.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 9:07 PM Hugh Paterson <hugh_paterson@sil.org>
> wrote:
>
>> @Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
>>
>> I'm interested in some clarification on the statement below:
>>
>> > It also suggests using invalid tags in the Japan section, where it
>> makes the bizarre statement that "BCP 47 makes no difference between '-'
>> and '_'". Be careful when citing this project.
>>
>> I'm wondering if the source of confusion at the OSM project might be
>> CLDR. I notice that the documentation at CLDR for suggested tags includes
>> underscores. See the documentation at [1].
>>
>> For my own understanding, am I correct to understand that CLDR tags are
>> not BCP47 tags? or put another way what is the relationship between CLDR
>> tags (approved ones) and BCP47 tags (approved ones).
>>
>> [1]:
>> http://www.unicode.org/cldr/charts/latest/supplemental/likely_subtags.html
>>
>> all the best,
>>
>
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> --
>> *Hugh Paterson III *Innovation Analyst
>> *Innovation Development & Experimentation*, *SIL International*
>>
>> *Web*: Contact & CV <http://hughandbecky.us/Hugh-CV/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-languages mailing list
>> Ietf-languages@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email