Re: [Ltru] RFC 3282: should we revise it?

["Phillips, Addison" <[e-mail]>]

> 
> Hi -
> 
> As a technical contributor (returning from two blissful weeks
> without email) ...

Welcome back!

> >
> > The one bit of language tagging infrastructure that we have not
> revised
> > since this whole body of work has started is RFC 3282, which
> defines
> > Content-Language and Accept-Language.
> 
> That was outside the scope for which ltru was originally chartered.

I agree, hence:

> 
> > This morning I had cause to want to reference it, but a desire
> not to
> > (since it depends on 3066 rather than the current-and-future BCP
> 47).
> > I'm pretty sure that the whole machinery of a WG is not needed to
> > revise this document--I'm thinking it would make a suitable
> > individual submission.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> > But I thought I'd mention it here to see if anyone had thoughts
> about
> > whether it were necessary, whether this list would make a
> suitable
> > place to solicit comments,
> 
> (As co-chair) This seems reasonable for now.  If it turns out to
> require
> significant discussion, or if a better WG "home" appears, we
> can redirect the discussion at that time.

Sounds reasonable. I doubt another WG would appear to make a home for this. Ever the optimist, I would hope that such a revision wouldn't require the level of effort needed for the BCP 47 work.

> 
> > and whether anyone thought a WG charter were necessary for
> > same (this last I studiously hope is not the case).
> 
> (As technical contributor) I would not support adding this work
> to the ltru charter.
> 

Absolutely not (shudders). Thanks for the note.

Addison

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.