Re: [Ltru] Proposed -t0- subtag

CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com> Wed, 20 July 2011 13:37 UTC

Return-Path: <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0FC21F8781 for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:37:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.589
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.589 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n4pv7WTnCn9X for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from snt0-omc3-s11.snt0.hotmail.com (snt0-omc3-s11.snt0.hotmail.com [65.55.90.150]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EECEE21F8748 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SNT142-W9 ([65.55.90.135]) by snt0-omc3-s11.snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 20 Jul 2011 06:37:39 -0700
Message-ID: <SNT142-w99066640019348DA5C17CB34C0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_9229ad88-267d-4c50-8e5e-302aac2d2125_"
X-Originating-IP: [64.134.191.120]
From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
To: <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:37:39 -0400
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <SNT142-w135D4CB08DDB77F4A40326B34C0@phx.gbl>
References: <SNT142-w18D0A48A7137C3535C2A5BB34A0@phx.gbl>, <131F80DEA635F044946897AFDA9AC3476A946379CF@EX-SEA31-D.ant.amazon.com>, <SNT142-w135D4CB08DDB77F4A40326B34C0@phx.gbl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jul 2011 13:37:39.0711 (UTC) FILETIME=[31B090F0:01CC46E2]
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Proposed -t0- subtag
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:37:44 -0000

Forgot to cc the list.
Best,
--C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar@hotmail.com 

From: cewcathar@hotmail.com
To: addison@lab126.com
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Proposed -t0- subtag
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 09:36:33 -0400









Thanks for the info.Best,
--C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar@hotmail.com 
From: addison@lab126.com
To: cewcathar@hotmail.com; ltru@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 07:36:49 -0700
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Proposed -t0- subtag




No. Mark is saying that we should publish the draft without a ‘t0’ “mechanism” subtag and then consider adding one later if there is need. Addison From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of CE Whitehead
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 6:41 AM
To: ltru@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Proposed -t0- subtag Hi. From: Mark Davis â <mark at macchiato.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:56:38 -0700
> I agree; so I think we ought to see how everything works first, before extending.  I assume this means the proposal is on hold.  Is there any point now in forwarding it on to another list (such as lingualist; I can do so as I have joined that) to get feedback; or do you just waiting to get feedback on the transliteration scheme from places like ala-lc (and then perhaps on how the scheme might work for transcription & speech recognition  from the ISPs/developers/researchers? on this list). Thanks if you can clarify this. Best, --C. E. Whiteheadcewcathar@hotmail.com> Mark> â Il meglio à lâinimico del bene â