Re: [Ltru] Translation of RFC 4646bis

"Richard Ishida" <> Fri, 21 August 2009 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4076C3A6DD4 for <>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:47:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.091
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.094, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N24OAoYfZFvr for <>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:47:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4F003A6974 for <>; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rishida ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 982FD4EF35; Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:47:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Richard Ishida" <>
To: "'Felix Sasaki'" <>, "'Stephane Bortzmeyer'" <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:47:39 +0100
Message-ID: <00f501ca227f$18db80f0$4a9282d0$@org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00F6_01CA2287.7A9FE8F0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Acof4VxKBcCuQ/yiR6yvJY+YdTLzogCnYFVQ
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: 'LTRU Working Group' <>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Translation of RFC 4646bis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:47:41 -0000

Don't translate yet.
I'm just about to change it to reflect RFC 5646.




Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)


From: [] On Behalf Of
Felix Sasaki
Sent: 18 August 2009 09:51
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer
Cc: LTRU Working Group
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Translation of RFC 4646bis


This took me a loong time to follow up ...

2009/7/20 Stephane Bortzmeyer <>

On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 07:47:57PM +0900,
 Felix Sasaki <> wrote

 a message of 45 lines which said:

> I am thinking about translating RFC 4646bis into German. A few
> questions: Are there other parties thinking of translations into
> other languages,

For several years, a group (disclaimer: I'm not a member) is
translating various RFCs in French:

4646 is already translated.

I regard the translation of RFC as mostly a waste of time:

* RFCs (standards track) are normative so translation is more risky
* they are interesting only for a small number of persons, who
 typically read english



True for many RFCs, but RFC 4646 and 4646bis contain a lot of explanatory
material about language tags. But argument is well taken.



I suggest to translate instead the Web site
<> which is intended for a broader audience
(and which exists only in english, which is ironic).



Good suggestion, I will try to gather some time for it. A translation of might be helpful