Re: [Ltru] telecon notes for 2007-11-28

Thanks. My apologies for any miswordings -- the notes were taken hurriedly!

Mark

On Nov 29, 2007 8:21 AM, Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  I'd like to make a correction to this record:
>
>
>
> Please delete "Peter could devote his day job to this."
>
>
>
> Please change "Never had in mind that we'd be having language tags" to
> "There had been at some point a suggestion of language tags constructed
> hierarchically using collections, but that was dropped."
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@icu-project.org]
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 29, 2007 7:52 AM
> *To:* LTRU Working Group
> *Subject:* [Ltru] telecon notes for 2007-11-28
>
>
> LTRU Telecon Notes 2007-11-28 Meeting
>
> Martin, John, Addison, Mark, Peter
>
> (notes are somewhat fragmented, as sometimes too involved in the
> conversation to copy)
>
> message - Issue on usability of extlang (Nov 26)
>
>
>
> Martin - right truncation assumes people speak the right most
>
>
>
> Mark - that's the reason for doing extlang, because they would work with
> truncation. Otherwise, just treat them as units; yue instead of zh-yue.
>
>
>
> Peter - my idea born out of dealing with the misalignment between things
> already in -2 and -3, plus existing practice (zh-hakka). That was the idea.
> Not a fully baked idea. No analysis to make sure that it makes sense for all
> of these cases.
>
>
>
> John - must have been some degree of analysis
>
>
>
> Peter - there was some. Would love to have had the JAC analyse and say
> which worked and which didn't. But that didn't happen. Not realistic
> expectation. Individuals didn't have the expertise. Peter could devote his
> day job to this. Never had in mind that we'd be having language tags
>
>
>
> John - did want French creole with tags.
>
>
>
> Peter -- didn't happen. Don't see the value of having a hierarchy. For
> language resources, what does it buy you. Having a tag for all Filipine
> languages doesn't buy you anything.
>
>
>
> John - clear that 636-2 was empirical, based on looking at books, without
> deep knowledge. BTW, is the move to get rid of "(Other)" still alive in 639?
>
>
>
>
> Peter - still alive. Will have to review. *Peter takes the action.*
>
>
>
> Peter - there was a thought that you could have a hierarchy. We had
> consensus in general that we didn't want a full hierarchy. The question is
> whether we want a limited hierarchy. "zh" is unique. [discussion of "no" and
> "ar"] Glancing down the list, there are maybe 15 if that where the
> macrolanguage has widespread use. Not much electronic content with many
> tags. The macrolanguages are not the same.
>
>
>
> John - some have dominant, some not; some many members, some not.
>
>
>
> Addision -- no real exciting revelations. We have certain languages with
> existing practices; how do we deal with it best. Could flip a coin.
>
>
>
> Addison - something has to inhabit zh. It could be Mandarin or Cantonese,
> but it can't be both. When it is an incompatible set, it has to be one
> choice. If you don't use extlang, you don't have to have have single
> content.
>
>
>
> John -- you still have the issue.
>
>
>
> Addision - yes, the problem still exists, but it isn't reflected in the
> tags.
>
> John - almost willing to throw in the towel. We would need to do the
> lookup algorithm. BUT, absolutely oppose making items equivalent (zh = cmn).
>
> Addison - ok.
> Mark - ok.
>
> John - so you're ok with not banning arb, cmn, etc.
>
> Addision - ok
> Mark - ok
>
> Martin - sorry for debate, but how do I tag written Chinese; what is the
> answer - zh or cmn?
>
> Addison - should use zh for compatibility
>
> Martin - in the document, or depend on others
>
> Addision - yes, in the document. Similar to the examples we already have.
>
> John - wouldn't mind looking through Peter's 15 to offer specific advice.
>
> Martin - so will have zh and cmn that are almost the same.
>
> John - yes, but as a result of empirical fact. The denotation is
> different. Is error to tag non-mandarin as mandarin, but not an error to tag
> as zh.
>
> Martin - what do we do with sign language?
>
> Addison - sgn never part of macrolanguage
>
> John - perfectly glad to deprecate sgn-region - *General consensus to
> deprecate this.*
>
>
>
> *General consensus to deprecate extlang, and grandfather tags of that
> form.*
>
> --
> Mark
>

-- 
Mark