Re: [Ltru] clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a related macrolanguage

Yes, that's why I thought the question was a false choice. I could imagine scenarios where I might find it acceptable to use only "cmn". But I'm not convinced this is the best solution given the history of the tag and my needs. I'm not so sure my needs are unique. Don Osborn's situation sounded similar to mine. As did Leif's, though I think I disagree with him about various solutions.

When there starts to be too much preferred tag logic based on subjective judgments (such as the relative dominance of encompassed languages) and there are different tags for the same thing -- that *could* in some rare cases mean something completely different (zh and cmn); and you're about to make nonsense of a rather popular set of grandfathered tags as grandfathered tags go (zh-yue, zh-min-nan, etc.)... Well? I'm having a hard time just writing that sentence, much less explaining that to the people that scowl at my explanation for the de-CH/gsw situation.

I'm thinking a lot of fallback situations in my world are really carefully considered business decisions so my primary concern is precise identification of the language. I figure if I can do that and have confidence in what those tags mean, I can throw any logic I want on top of it.

Regards,

Karen Broome

________________________________________
From: Felix Sasaki [fsasaki@w3.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 7:17 PM
To: Broome, Karen
Cc: Peter Constable; ltru@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ltru] clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a related macrolanguage

Broome, Karen さんは書きました:
> I think extlang will likely be a cleaner solution to me than what you might offer, but I'm open to that as long as the preferred tagging and associated semantics are clear.
>

this sounds like your vote

1: C
2: A

could also be

1: B (if there is a clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a related
macrolanguage available)
2: A

but given the long discussion about sec.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-14#section-4.1.1
it seems difficult to formulate that guidance.

Felix

> I think de-CH is a problem. I see more problems like this if we move forward extlangless with multiple "preferred" tag choices for the same thing and subjective distinctions. In the face of that, I start to like ISO 639-6.
>
> I *like* hierarchies.
>
> Karen
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Peter Constable [petercon@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 6:40 PM
> To: Broome, Karen
> Cc: LTRU Working Group
> Subject: RE: clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a related     macrolanguage
>
> Could you live without extlang provided those conditions were met, or do you think those conditions can't be met without extlang?
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Broome, Karen [mailto:Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 5:01 PM
>> To: Peter Constable
>> Cc: LTRU Working Group
>> Subject: RE: clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a related
>> macrolanguage
>>
>> Yes, Peter.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
>>> Of Peter Constable
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 4:58 PM
>>> To: LTRU Working Group
>>> Subject: [Ltru] clear guidance on tagging in cases involving a
>>> related macrolanguage
>>>
>>> [changing the subject per Randy's request]
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: Broome, Karen [mailto:Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com]
>>>>
>>>> Either way, zh-yue will remain valid, but not necessarily
>>>>
>>> preferred.
>>>
>>>> Having clear preferences is very important to me. I really don't
>>>>
>>> want
>>>
>>>> to recommend that people use "zh" for Mandarin or have to explain
>>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>> someone why I think a deprecated tag is preferred in this industry
>>>>
>>> but
>>>
>>>> not others.
>>>>
>>> And in another msg,
>>>
>>>
>>>> I care more about identification than applications.
>>>>
>>> So, it sounds to me like what you really care about are the
>>> following:
>>>
>>> - Don't have a recommendation "tag Madarin content as zh"
>>>
>>> - Have a single clear recommendation for how to tag each language
>>> (one or the other of "cmn" or "zh-cmn" for Mandarin would do).
>>>
>>>
>>> Is that right?
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ltru mailing list
>>> Ltru@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>

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