Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags)
"Debbie Garside" <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk> Wed, 16 April 2008 16:29 UTC
Return-Path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ltru-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ltru-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B239C3A6F86; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8583A6F84 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.349
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.649, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uz8TU-WW7i59 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.nexbyte.net (132.nexbyte.net [62.197.41.132]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA203A6B35 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 145.nexbyte.net ([62.197.41.145]) by mx1.nexbyte.net (mx1.nexbyte.net [62.197.41.132]) (MDaemon PRO v9.6.4) with ESMTP id md50008000573.msg for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:38:15 +0100
X-Spam-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:38:15 +0100 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source)
X-MDRemoteIP: 62.197.41.145
X-Return-Path: prvs=1992d49b69=debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-Envelope-From: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: ltru@ietf.org
Received: from CPQ86763045110 ([83.67.121.192]) by 145.nexbyte.net with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:29:47 +0100
From: Debbie Garside <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
To: 'Mark Davis' <mark.davis@icu-project.org>, "'Phillips, Addison'" <addison@amazon.com>
References: <48037FF9.9030103@gmx.de> <48049274.3090501@gmx.de><6.0.0.20.2.20080416155918.08629ec0@localhost><30b660a20804160646n14a12f71r589d1728c72db695@mail.gmail.com><4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA01200D8D49@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com> <30b660a20804160858k29f835a9w2a90d0ed399fe791@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:30:27 +0100
Message-ID: <0e6a01c89fdf$2e02fbd0$0a00a8c0@CPQ86763045110>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
In-Reply-To: <30b660a20804160858k29f835a9w2a90d0ed399fe791@mail.gmail.com>
Thread-Index: Acif24lJenJrONDvRMeqnX6R/EW+SAAAiVuw
X-MDAV-Processed: mx1.nexbyte.net, Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:38:17 +0100
Cc: 'Julian Reschke' <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, 'LTRU Working Group' <ltru@ietf.org>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags)
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1942114813=="
Sender: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Rather than re-inventing the wheel, why not just go with what is already written within RFC4646bis-12 ---- The language tag is composed of one or more parts, known as "subtags". Each subtag consists of a sequence of alphanumeric characters. Subtags are distinguished and separated from one another by a hyphen ("-", ABNF [RFC5234] %x2D). A language tag consists of a "primary language" subtag and a (possibly empty) series of subsequent subtags, each of which refines or narrows the range of languages identified by the overall tag. ---- By adding the information with regard to script and region you may encourage people to go ahead and create their own tags as opposed to reading RFC4646bis. There are many other issues to be considered e.g. suppress script. Best regards Debbie Garside _____ From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mark Davis Sent: 16 April 2008 16:59 To: Phillips, Addison Cc: Julian Reschke; LTRU Working Group; HTTP Working Group Subject: Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags) That works for me. On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com> wrote: Mark wrote: -- In summary, a language tag is composed of one or more parts: typically a primary language subtag followed optionally by a series of other subtags such as script and region. -- I think that is either too specific or not specific enough J Perhaps: In summary, a language tag is composed of one or more subtags separated by hyphens. Typically there will be a primary language subtag to which other subtags are sometimes appended to indicate linguistic variations such as script or region. Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Lab126 (Amazon) Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is not a feature. It is an architecture. From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mark Davis Sent: mercredi 16 avril 2008 06:46 To: Martin Duerst Cc: Julian Reschke; LTRU Working Group; HTTP Working Group Subject: Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags) Agreed. Even that is incorrect, since there may not be a primary language subtag, such as in the case of "x-duerst". So I'd recommend something more like: > In summary, a language tag is composed of one or more parts: A > primary language tag and a possibly empty series of subtags: => In summary, a language tag is composed of one or more parts: typically a primary language subtag followed optionally by a series of other subtags such as script and region. On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 12:01 AM, Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote: At 20:33 08/04/15, Julian Reschke wrote: > >OK, > >thanks for all the feedback so far. I (hopefully) have addressed many of the issues; here's the new proposed text for 3.5: > >------ >3.5. Language Tags > > A language tag, as defined in [RFC4646], identifies a natural > language spoken, written, or otherwise conveyed by human beings for > communication of information to other human beings. Computer > languages are explicitly excluded. HTTP uses language tags within > the Accept-Language and Content-Language fields. > > In summary, a language tag is composed of one or more parts: A > primary language tag and a possibly empty series of subtags: > > language-tag = <Language-Tag, defined in [RFC4646], Section 2.1> > > White space is not allowed within the tag and all tags are case- > insensitive. The name space of language subtags is administered by > the IANA (see > <http://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry>). This is going very much in the right direction, but there is some confusion about what a subtag means. Where it says "A primary language tag and a possibly empty series of subtags", the first tag (e.g. 'en' in 'en-US') seems to not be a subtag, but the subtag registry clearly also includes that as a subtag, and RFC 4646 is using terminology consistent with that. Regards, Martin. > Example tags include: > > en, en-US, es-419, az-Arab, x-pig-latin, man-Nkoo-GN > > See RFC 4646 for further information. >------ > >(see also <http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/13>). > > >BR, Julian > #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp _______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru -- Mark -- Mark
_______________________________________________ Ltru mailing list Ltru@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Martin Duerst
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Martin Duerst
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Mark Davis
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Mark Davis
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Debbie Garside
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Phillips, Addison
- [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Accept-L… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Acce… John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Acce… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Acce… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Acce… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Acce… Julian Reschke
- [Ltru] Issue 181 (Accept-Language: which RFC4647 … Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (lang… Julian Reschke
- [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language tag ma… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Phillips, Addison
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Julian Reschke
- Re: [Ltru] Issue 181, was: Issue 113 (language ta… Julian Reschke