IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ltru] Geocoordinates

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Wed, 11 March 2009 17:30 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
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 EC9C43A69F1 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:30:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.088, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2]
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 l2bPq318D9-p for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:30:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.68]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848DE3A6980 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:30:22 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=gScSPB4B1EMEJdtFIKzwyaZr66aBhOLlCl9178ks2CMLypepNfhVqMP7xdPtDxMe; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [69.3.28.96] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1LhSGg-0004lk-M3 for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:30:58 -0400
Message-ID: <006101c9a26f$42f21240$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <20090310093127.GB2850@nic.fr><003b01c9a1ab$7eacc060$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><20090310184601.GD7167@mercury.ccil.org><4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA019E622691@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com><20090310200354.GE7167@mercury.ccil.org> <DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB83579566E654C846@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:31:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d8886924630f8852f1735d927fd47b2aba28005fc63b2863ac6d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 69.3.28.96
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Geocoordinates
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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/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, 11 Mar 2009 17:30:24 -0000

Hi -

> From: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com>
> To: "John Cowan" <cowan@ccil.org>; "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
> Cc: "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] Geocoordinates
>
> From: ltru-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ltru-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of John Cowan
> 
> > So what's left is:
> >
> > (a) codes for language collections that aren't in 639-5, which could
> > be added to BCP 47 as 4-letter primary language subtags (that size is
> > currently reserved);
> 
> I'd be resistant to 4-letter primary language subtags.
> I have made derivative use of BCP 47 tag syntax 
> with the modification that the only obligatory subtag
> is the script subtag.
> Introducing different 4-letter subtags within BCP 47 syntax 
> would create conflicts with this or other similar derivative
> uses of our language tag syntax.

As a technical contributor...

I find this line of argument unpersuasive.  We should only
concern ourselves with compatibility with conformant
implementations.  If someone implements something
"derived from" the spec which does not follow it to the
letter, they're on their own.

Randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email