Re: [Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4645 (7605)

[Doug Ewell <[e-mail]>]

Timothy,

The answer is that I could not think of any other way to describe such a direct yet patently false statement, especially made by someone who had taken enough interest to read through an RFC related to BCP 47, except as a deliberate and egregious attempt to misinform.

BCP 47 language tags are specified for use in HTML, XML, CSS, SVG, HTTP, PNG, and other standards, and are a core specification for CLDR and for Windows and Linux locales. So it does seem extraordinary to claim that BCP 47 language tags, much less language tags and subtags as a whole, are obsolete.

If so, then what mechanism would you say has replaced them? Or would you say that the entire concept of tagging and identifying content as to its language and variety is obsolete?

What benefit would be realized by posting an erratum to an RFC that the technique, technology, or process described by that RFC is obsolete? There are hundreds of RFCs that describe technologies and processes which time has passed by to a much greater extent than language tags.

Wouldn't it make more sense, if this is truly your belief, to propose to IETF and/or the RFC Editor that BCP 47 be moved to Obsolete status? It might be interesting to see the response to such a proposal.

—Doug

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 4:32:31 PM
To: Doug Ewell <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4645 (7605)

Doug,
Well it looks like I didn't hit reply all when I sent that email to John Cowan so you can have a look at the breif discussion below.  Hopefully that answers your question.  Now I'm ready to hear your answer to my question.





> On 08/16/2023 2:32 AM EDT John Cowan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> Oh yes, we register new variant subtags all the time, pretty much on
> request.  New language subtags track ISO 639 (typically several per year),
> and new country subtags track ISO 3166 (these don't come up much, I think
> South Sudan was the most recent).
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 9:39 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> > I guess I misunderstood how a subtag could be not obsolete when its parent
> > is.  Can new subtags be registered today?
> >
> >
> > > On 08/15/2023 9:28 PM EDT John Cowan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Apparently the actual registry, which is what matters, is now at <
> > >
> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/language-subtag-registry/language-subtag-registry
> > >.
> > > The page previously pointing to it is obsolete; it is misleading to say
> > > "language tags and subtags are obsolete", when they are not.
> > >