Re: [Ltru] Minor proofreading nits again (was: Re: draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-03)

Thanks for finding those typos. Notes below.

Mark
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 15:59, CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com> wrote:

>  Hi.
>
> I looked over http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-03quickly; just a couple of minor things.
>
> 1.  Intro
>
> "Transforms such as transliteration may vary depending not only on the
>  basis of the source and target script, but also on language.  Thus
>  the Russian <U+041F U+0443 U+0442 U+0438 U+043D> (which corresponds
>  to the Cyrillic <PE, U, TE, I, EN>) transliterates into "Putin" in
>  English but "Poutine" in French.  The identifier could be used to
>  indicate a desired mechanical transformation in an API, or could be
>  used to tag data that has been converted (mechanically or by hand)
>  according to a transliteration method."
>
> { COMMENT:  Try "Transforms such as transliterations?"  (that is, make
> "transliterations" plural I think).  Also I would change "could" to "can"
> because you are using the present tense elsewhere in this paragraph}
>

Made it plural.

As to could vs can, it's the mood not the tense.

=>
>
> "Transforms such as transliterations may vary depending not only on the
>  basis of the source and target script, but also on language.  Thus
>  the Russian <U+041F U+0443 U+0442 U+0438 U+043D> (which corresponds
>  to the Cyrillic <PE, U, TE, I, EN>) transliterates into "Putin" in
>  English but "Poutine" in French.  The identifier can be used to
>  indicate a desired mechanical transformation in an API, or can be
>  used to tag data that has been converted (mechanically or by hand)
>  according to a transliteration method."
>
> * * *
>
> 2.5
> { QUESTION:  do you want to mention that BP 47 language subtags are updated
> from time to time and this does not mean that the -t extension RFC will be
> updated at the same time (or does it?). }
>

No, the RFC is not updated. The valid subtags would change. I think that is
pretty clear from the text, since the valid subtags are defined by BCP47,
but if others don't think so we can add a note.

>
> * * *
> 2.6 last par
>
> "Accepted tickets result an a new entry in the machine-readable CLDR
>    BCP47 data, or in the case of a clarified description, modifications
>    to the description attribute value for an existing entry."
>
> { ***IMPORTANT COMMENT:  typo it seems:  "Accepted tickets result in a new
> entry . . . " should replace "Accepted tickets result an a new entry . . . "
> }
>

an => in

>
> =>
>
> "Accepted tickets result in a new entry in the machine-readable CLDR
>    BCP47 data, or in the case of a clarified description, modifications
>    to the description attribute value for an existing entry."
>
>
> That's all I found but I read this pretty quickly this time.
>
> Best,
>
> --C. E. Whitehead
> cewcathar@hotmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>
>