[Ltru] Re: DOCTYPE ltru

"Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net> Mon, 18 September 2006 05:49 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPC0J-0003aL-PH; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:49:15 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPC0I-0003XV-0N for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:49:14 -0400
Received: from mta10.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.202]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GPBom-0000RB-L4 for ltru@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:37:24 -0400
Received: from DGBP7M81 ([68.67.66.131]) by mta10.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with SMTP id <20060918053719.TTBF27224.mta10.adelphia.net@DGBP7M81> for <ltru@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 01:37:19 -0400
Message-ID: <01d801c6dae4$82eac360$6401a8c0@DGBP7M81>
From: Doug Ewell <dewell@adelphia.net>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1GP9m1-000493-7e@megatron.ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 22:37:20 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Subject: [Ltru] Re: DOCTYPE ltru
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy dot claranet dot de> wrote:

>> Capitalization doesn't mean anything in language tags and never has.
>
> Sure, I'm talking about a naive subtag to IDREF implementation for the 
> registry based on some MUSTard in chapter 3.1:
>
> | Subtags whose 'Type' field is 'script' (in other words,
> | subtags defined by ISO 15924) MUST use titlecase.

"yi-latn" is not a subtag, it's a redundant tag:  RFC 4645 section 2, 
point 7:

>  7.  Tags in the [RFC3066] registry that were not deprecated,
>      consisted entirely of subtags already in this document, and
>      have the correct form and format for tags defined by [RFC4646]
>      were converted to records of type "redundant" in the ILSR.
>      For example, "zh-Hant" is now defined by [RFC4646] because
>      'zh' is an [ISO639-1] code element and 'Hant' is an [ISO15924]
>      code element, and both are defined as subtags in the ILSR.

I guess the question is whether "yi-latn" does or does not have the 
"correct format," taking its capitalization into account.  I note that 
nobody objected to it during the rather long WG and IETF review periods.

>> We should fix it in the registry (via the reg process if possible, 
>> but certainly via 4645bis if not)
>
> Okay.

Whatever happened to "fidelity with the source standards at all costs"? 
The RFC 3066 tag registry is the source standard for redundant tags.

--
Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California, USA
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
RFC 4645  *  UTN #14


_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru