Re: [Ltru] Fwd: draft-davis-t-langtag-ext

[Mykyta Yevstifeyev <[e-mail]>]

Hello,

I've identified the following issue in the draft.

Section 2.2 says:

>     The subtags in the 't' extension are of the following form:
>
>       +--------+-------------------------+----------------------------+
>       | Label  | ABNF                    | Comment                    |
>       +--------+-------------------------+----------------------------+
>       | t_ext= | "t"                     | Extension                  |
>       |        | ("-" lang *("-" field)  | Source + optional field(s) |
>       |        | / 1*("-" field))        | Field(s) only (no source)  |
>       | lang=  | language                | [BCP47  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-davis-t-langtag-ext-01#ref-BCP47>], with restrictions |
>       |        | ["-" script]            |                            |
>       |        | ["-" region]            |                            |
>       |        | *("-" variant)          |                            |
>       | field= | sep 1*("-" 3*8alphanum) | With restrictions          |
>       | sep=   | 1ALPHA 1DIGIT           | Subtag separators          |
>       +--------+-------------------------+----------------------------+

I should note that, first of all, reference to RFC 5234 is missing; 
moreover, and this is more important, making the ABNF definition in the 
form of table makes such definition an invalid one, in terms of RFC 
5234.  Also, there are a number of ABNF nits here.  So, please consider 
changing this to:

>     The subtags in the 't' extension are of the following form, defined
>     using ABNF [RFC5234] in<t-ext>  rule:
>
>       t-ext    = "t" ("-" lang *("-" field) / 1*("-" field))
>       lang     = langtag
>       field    = sep 1*("-" 3*8alphanum)
>       sep      = ALPHA DIGIT
>       alphanum = ALPHA / DIGIT
>
>     where<langta>  rule is specified in BCP 47 [BCP47],<ALPHA>  and<DIGIT>
>     rules - in RFC 5234 [RFC5234].
Also, the minors comments on references.  Reference to BCP 47 should 
include both references to RFC 5646 and RFC 4647, like:
>     [BCP47]    Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Matching of Language Tags",
>                BCP 47, RFC 4647, September 2006.
>
>                Phillips, A., Ed., and M. Davis, Ed., "Tags for Identifying
>                Languages", BCP 47, RFC 5646, September 2009.
...and, referencing UTS 35 you shouldn't reference specific parts of the 
document; this should be done in the text.  Finally, I don't see where 
[US-ASCII] is used in the text.

Thanks,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev

07.07.2011 2:49, Pete Resnick wrote:
> Most of the people on the ietf-languages list are probably on the 
> [e-mail] list as well, but I wanted to confirm that everyone got 
> a chance to review this before it proceeded to the IESG. Please have a 
> look at the ltru archive 
> <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/current/maillist.html> and 
> send any comments to the [e-mail] list since that's where 
> discussion seems to be taking place.
>
> Thanks.
>
> pr