IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Ltru] Extended language tags

Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com> Fri, 05 October 2007 05:23 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 1IdfeY-0003F0-DM; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:23:10 -0400
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Idfau-0007ra-5y for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:19:24 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idfat-0007r8-IR for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:19:23 -0400
Received: from mailc.microsoft.com ([131.107.115.214] helo=smtp.microsoft.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idfas-00081T-A2 for ltru@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:19:23 -0400
Received: from tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.56.116.111) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.177.2; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 22:19:21 -0700
Received: from NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.39]) by tk1-exhub-c101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.56.116.111]) with mapi; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 22:19:21 -0700
From: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com>
To: Don Osborn <dzo@bisharat.net>, 'Andrew Cunningham' <lang.support@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:14:32 -0700
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Extended language tags
Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Extended language tags
Thread-Index: AcgG63r0wRUkk5e7R7OOF2/JgQKd+QAAUg/wAAh2f4g=
Message-ID: <C9BF0238EED3634BA1866AEF14C7A9E55A593E4E7D@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
References: <E1IdT7z-0001vv-Ly@megatron.ietf.org> <C9BF0238EED3634BA1866AEF14C7A9E55A597AC370@NA-EXMSG-C116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <9d70cb000710041801k44ee5016u7374af1e1a17f6bc@mail.gmail.com>, <002101c806f0$9c7dffc0$d579ff40$@net>
In-Reply-To: <002101c806f0$9c7dffc0$d579ff40$@net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Score: -8.0 (--------)
X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:23:09 -0400
Cc: "ltru@ietf.org" <ltru@ietf.org>
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

> but do believe that if there is a bias in the system to specificity, when specificity is not always the ideal
> approach, then it will inevitably encounter calls for flexibility later.

My opinion is that I don't mind the extra detail.  An application could choose to ignore that detail if it wasn't warranted in their case, or use it if necessary, but if they don't have the detail available, then they don't have the option.  (And IMO having the detail as a field in the registry doesn't count as being readily available)

In truth I don't mind much if we use extlang or not.  To me it makes a little more sense to have it and I don't see any disadvantages to its presence.

What I would like to see is this question being resolved :)  At some point I have to turn any decision/RFC into code for our various products, and I'd like as much time as possible.

- Shawn


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email