Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomalyinupcomingregistry)
"Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk> Wed, 15 July 2009 12:32 UTC
Return-Path: <prvs=1447403586=debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03FD3A6C88 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.705
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.705 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KTbD38sRCb+e for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.nexbyte.net (132.nexbyte.net [62.197.41.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EA13A6C75 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 145.nexbyte.net ([62.197.41.145]) by mx1.nexbyte.net (mx1.nexbyte.net [62.197.41.132]) (MDaemon PRO v9.6.6) with ESMTP id md50009631663.msg for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:21:08 +0100
X-Spam-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:21:08 +0100 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source)
X-MDRemoteIP: 62.197.41.145
X-Return-Path: prvs=1447403586=debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-Envelope-From: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ltru@ietf.org
Received: from CPQ86763045110 ([83.67.121.192]) by 145.nexbyte.net with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:01:02 +0100
From: Debbie Garside <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
To: 'Randy Presuhn' <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>, 'LTRU Working Group' <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <548832E2D1D1486EBAC82789E800224A@DGBP7M81><1d5f01ca04a2$c495dfd0$0c00a8c0@CPQ86763045110> <036201ca04a9$c6500ec0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:00:33 +0100
Message-ID: <1dcc01ca0519$f2bbb6b0$0c00a8c0@CPQ86763045110>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
Thread-Index: AcoExZndZwd0A4NlQZKsK0un4iE/ggAUx4Rw
In-Reply-To: <036201ca04a9$c6500ec0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
X-MDAV-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:21:09 +0100
Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomalyinupcomingregistry)
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:32:51 -0000
Well for starters, there are separate codes for Catalan and Valencian :-) And, I rather like the way ISO 639-6 deals with variants of Chinese. Perhaps you would like to tell me how many of the 7000+ codes of ISO 639-3 will be used. My guess is approximately 2-300 at present but over time more and more. The answer is the same for ISO 639-6. Essentially, all the reasons for including ISO 639-6 are the same as for including ISO 639-3. Unless of course, you think that ISO 639-3 is perfect and defines all languages distinctly and that anything else cannot, is not, and definitely is not a language. Then of course you have to decide that BCP 47 will only deal with languages and not dialects. Then, and only then, may you exclude ISO 639-6. Debbie > -----Original Message----- > From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Randy Presuhn > Sent: 14 July 2009 18:38 > To: LTRU Working Group > Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: > Anomalyinupcomingregistry) > > Hi - > > > From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk> > > To: "'Doug Ewell'" <doug@ewellic.org>; "'LTRU Working Group'" > > <ltru@ietf.org> > > Cc: <L.Gillam@surrey.ac.uk> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:47 AM > > Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anomaly > > inupcomingregistry) > ... > > I think we pretty much worked this out a few years ago... See > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/msg06482.html > > But as I said in my previous message, I am not quite ready > yet as it > > will involve some flagging of the data. > ... > > As a technical contributor... > > How much content (as a percentage of internet traffic, or as > a percentage of on-line library holdings, for example) would > be covered by 639-6 (when it's done) that would not (or could > not) be covered by the registry updates recently approved and > the normal operation of ietf-languages@iana.org? > What languages does it cover that cannot be addressed under > the current regime? > > I'd really like to know the what language tagging problem > would be fixed by digging into 639-6, what the payoff (in > terms of users served or content tagged) would be, and why a > working group would be necessary to cope with it. > > Randy > > _______________________________________________ > Ltru mailing list > Ltru@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru > > >
- [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: Anom… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering (to handle 639-6 or other… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Kent Karlsson
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Gerard Meijssen
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Broome, Karen
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Kent Karlsson
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Broome, Karen
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (wasFW:An… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Debbie Garside
- [Ltru] Rechartering (in general) Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Peter Constable
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Doug Ewell
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Mark Davis ⌛
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … CE Whitehead
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Broome, Karen
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW: … Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (was FW:A… Broome, Karen