[Ltru] Re: Registry change of the day: prefix with more than one subtag

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 12 July 2007 08:13 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8tng-0001LX-I7; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:13:24 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1I8tne-0001CL-9D for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:13:22 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8tnd-00019q-Qp for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:13:21 -0400
Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I8tnZ-0002ik-GU for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 04:13:21 -0400
Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 289841C00E9; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:13:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E081C007E; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:13:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214F958EBF1; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:13:17 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:13:17 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com>
Message-ID: <20070712081317.GA2479@nic.fr>
References: <E1I7Chz-0004HK-Kx@megatron.ietf.org> <006501c7c2b7$126dd4e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <006501c7c2b7$126dd4e0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0
X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 i686
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Subject: [Ltru] Re: Registry change of the day: prefix with more than one subtag
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

On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 10:56:33PM -0700,
 Doug Ewell <dewell@roadrunner.com> wrote 
 a message of 72 lines which said:

> I can't think of a clean way to tell software which variants can be
> used together and which cannot,

I believe that we should handle this case under the general rule
"standards cannot prevent every stupid thing":

"Validity of a tag is not everything. A tag may be valid and
meaningless. This is unavoidable with a generative system like the
language subtag mechanism. So, ar-Cyrl-AQ - Arabic written with the
cyrillic script, as used in Antarctica - is perfectly valid but should
nevertheless be avoided because it has no relationship with the
reality."

There does not seem to be similar text in 4646bis. Do we think it
should be included or is it too paternalistic for readers?


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