IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Tue, 03 June 2008 18:57 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 [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 034CB3A6A8E; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:57:53 -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 899CF3A6A60 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.349
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 PqzObC9ZcXKp for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:57:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D01A3A66B4 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 11:57:50 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=irXzvMurngxCOnRQ0e8Ak1AN5W8PmVcJd87L96it8Y4NYdvgjh8rDrgFZu7oHcDB; 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 [68.164.89.73] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1K3bhg-0007EK-Oz for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:57:53 -0400
Message-ID: <00a801c8c5ab$cf0bddc0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <01c301c8bbe5$8c2810c0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><6.0.0.20.2.20080527170755.05bd89c0@localhost><002f01c8c024$0dcdb5c0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><6.0.0.20.2.20080528163346.074fac80@localhost><001f01c8c122$0cbcae80$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA013A84C314@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com><007601c8c1bc$84d93920$6801a8c0@oemcomputer><104f01c8c1d8$94ad6f30$0a00a8c0@CPQ86763045110><30b660a20805291559x4f6243a8pecc7ee92c2a36d9c@mail.gmail.com><E19FDBD7A3A7F04788F00E90915BD36C13C251B4FC@USSDIXMSG20.spe.sony.com><30b660a20805300911j1713bff0xa7e8e468e039d42@mail.gmail.com><1EEB09866D70AA48A93C0D9EB7237F0B014C231039@USSDIXMSG20.spe.sony.com> <008e01c8c5a7$1ba88b60$6801a8c0@oemcomputer> <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA013AABBD22@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2008 11:58:27 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888a63b7957ab9b23b3b1a128dab1539cc97edeb7413827a486350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 68.164.89.73
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang
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/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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ltru-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

hi -

As a technical contributor...

> From: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
> To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>; "LTRU Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:32 AM
> Subject: RE: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang
...
> A corollary example might help:
> 
> It is always permissible to tag US English as 'en'.
> It is also permissible, within one's own application,
> to require that people who want something other than
> US English to us a different tag from 'en'.
> For example, they can be required to use the tag 'en-GB'.
> 
> What is not permissible is to dismiss someone else's
> UK English content tagged as 'en' as wrong.
...

It is also permissible, within one's own application,
to tag UK English as 'en' and require US English to be
tagged 'en-US'.  But "permissible" doesn't mean "advisable".
I would argue that if an application knows the difference
and cares about the difference, that it would be much better
to use both 'en-GB' and 'en-US', and reserve naked 'en' for
the cases where there's no value in making the distinction
(e.g., it can't tell or doesn't care).

Randy

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email