IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net> Tue, 10 October 2006 06:46 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXBNt-0006t8-Dy; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:46:37 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXBNs-0006t3-Fs for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:46:36 -0400
Received: from mta9.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.199]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXBNr-00032d-7B for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:46:36 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([68.67.66.131]) by mta9.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20061010064634.WTDC23918.mta9.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:46:34 -0400
Message-ID: <005101c6ec37$d485c210$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@adelphia.net>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1GX1Gr-0002h2-RI@megatron.ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 23:46:35 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at nic dot fr> wrote:

> I think the more information, the better (*), IF AND ONLY IF:
>
> ** this new information does not require a new source when building 
> the registry, (because such a new source would complicate the building 
> process and would add one more dependency, would add one more standard 
> to track, etc),

It comes from the same ISO 639-3 data file as the other data.

> ** this new tag does not bother the existing parsers.

Existing parsers could be designed in one of two ways: either they could 
ignore an unknown field, or they could abort with an error.  My guess is 
that most parsers will fall into the second category (my Registry-to-DLL 
converter does).  This is true for any other possible change to the 
Registry structure, including the proposed Script field that would 
replace Suppress-Script.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email