IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net> Sun, 08 October 2006 19:04 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GWdxF-0004EF-MA; Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:04:53 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GWdxD-0004EA-4U for ltru@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:04:51 -0400
Received: from mta10.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.202]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GWdxB-00026l-SB for ltru@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:04:51 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([68.67.66.131]) by mta10.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20061008190443.EFPK7818.mta10.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Oct 2006 15:04:43 -0400
Message-ID: <000d01c6eb0c$9d8a76b0$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@adelphia.net>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 12:04:43 -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: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
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

Is there any sort of consensus for or against John Cowan's proposal to 
add a "Language-Type" field that captures the ISO 639-3 classifications 
(extinct, historic, etc.)?

I've added this data to the Registry contents in draft-4645bis-01, and 
I'm writing text that explains the exact process for populating these 
fields; this can easily be removed if the WG ends up rejecting the 
proposal.  But since I'm getting ready to release draft-01, I'd like to 
know which way the wind is blowing on this.

--
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