Re: [Ltru] draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-03

Mark Davis ☕ <> Thu, 14 July 2011 15:57 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D43A21F8BDD for <>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.546
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.246, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EvPy25FqHkso for <>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E967E21F8CD2 for <>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19so185199gxk.31 for <>; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=w8uxfV4+aBgf65EIA80H8Sr/Xm7zg1bQ8jAJEcGT6I4=; b=dw8dmqGfJwn7Ep9azNMWUdhpE6o/GCH0GMMcwCXow2QrhHAEH/IIqt28jfULp3ms1F GMZAaeLm0MbeaqL0DK2MOFV7Jbkj3LIp4u1W3sUY9vgGjYTzSy3a1LhFG3O35uF4kWXP K/CeaGnD9lNoF1IJDywRmmJ3k7ONrsRwlrFYQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id l6mr2631431yba.364.1310659051420; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 08:57:31 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: fNOq3JPp_hx_advYVgtSsctILsY
Message-ID: <>
From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFyayBEYXZpcyDimJU=?= <>
To: Felix Sasaki <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd3b2c82e7c1504a8099760
Subject: Re: [Ltru] draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-03
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:57:34 -0000

Here's what I have in my working copy:

   <t>The t extension is not intended for use in structured data that
already provides for source and target language identifiers.

For example, this is the case in localization interchange formats such as

In such cases, it would be inappropriate to use "ja-t-it" for the target
language tag because the source language tag

"it" would already be present in the data. Instead one would use the
language tag "ja".


*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 21:54, Felix Sasaki <>wrote;wrote:

> The extension defined in this document is not meant to be used for (mostly
> localization related) formats that already align source and target text in a
> dedicated, often XML based structure. For example, in an XLIFF file aligning
> a source like the original writing of Italian cities and a target, i.e. the
> Japanese transliteration of the cities, using "ja-kana-t-it" for the target
> would be overgenerating. Instead one would use the language tag "ja-kana".