Re: Pending requests

"Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org> Fri, 27 November 2015 17:37 UTC

Return-Path: <doug@ewellic.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Delivered-To: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3FB87C5671 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:37:33 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id noI7jAvAytG7 for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:37:33 +0100 (CET)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from pechora8.dc.icann.org (pechora8.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:74]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A29377C566C for <ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:37:32 +0100 (CET)
Received: from p3plsmtpa12-06.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa12-06.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [68.178.252.235]) by pechora8.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tARHbBKU005869 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <ietf-languages@iana.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 17:37:31 GMT
Received: from DougEwell ([75.166.133.212]) by p3plsmtpa12-06.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with id mhd91r00V4b74dX01hdACG; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:37:10 -0700
Message-ID: <ECFAC9292A4341F58133DEC91617E0D7@DougEwell>
From: Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org>
To: Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com>, Michael Everson <everson@evertype.com>
References: <D27CA94F.33F15%kent.karlsson14@telia.com> <96687356-88E4-4914-A2DB-24D7E3DD8E9C@evertype.com> <CA+cwSm8WgQFk_mMB0kFbP8MYTUZQ=3qQ4knh8tT-ku=w12Gi=w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+cwSm8WgQFk_mMB0kFbP8MYTUZQ=3qQ4knh8tT-ku=w12Gi=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pending requests
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:37:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
X-Greylist: Sender DNS name whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (pechora8.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.74]); Fri, 27 Nov 2015 17:37:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: ietflang IETF Languages Discussion <ietf-languages@iana.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf-languages@alvestrand.no
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Language tag discussions <ietf-languages.alvestrand.no>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/options/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-languages@alvestrand.no>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages>, <mailto:ietf-languages-request@alvestrand.no?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 17:37:34 -0000

Philip Newton wrote:

>>> I'm indifferent as to whether one should add a variant subtag for
>>> "Ogden Basic English", but if added, the subtag must *not* be
>>> "basiceng", as that would certainly be interpreted as some/any kind
>>> of "simplified English". "ogden”, "ogdeneng" would be fine.
>>
>> Interpreted by whom? The parameters for the subtags are given in the
>> proposals which are archived by IANA.
>
> By users who do not read the IANA submissions before using a tag they
> saw and think fits their use case.
> [...]
> You can't completely prevent people from doing stuff they do not
> understand, but sometimes the potential for mistaken use can be
> lessened by the choice of term.

This is a delicate balance. It was intended that users would pay 
attention to the other fields in the Registry, such as Description and 
Prefix, in order to understand what a tag or subtag means and how to 
create their own. But we know many users can't be bothered with reading 
the instructions, so it doesn't hurt to make the Subtag value somewhat 
mnemonic.

At the same time, we have often been bogged down in "beauty contests" 
trying to pick the perfect subtag value, usually a futile task 
especially with an 8-character limit.

Backing up a bit...

> A bit like people who see "de-DE, fr-FR, it-IT" and then produce
> "jp-JP (or ja-JA), en-EN" and similar tags.

A bit. This is more a matter of reading BCP 47, which seems like a 
difficult (not just lengthy) effort to many. Even Don Osborn said he 
"got lost in the wording of RFC 5646," in a section I thought was 
relatively straightforward.

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸