IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Thu, 22 May 2008 08:26 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 F2AB43A6AE2; Thu, 22 May 2008 01:26:25 -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 4F7883A6AB9 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2008 01:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 TNGqfTAetN-q for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 May 2008 01:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 694503A68FC for <ltru@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 May 2008 01:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=qg8rdTjgcU3j+u5vW002mGHgjyDyZGFzFWf26hSgnlyGTZZ3i6TXgQxYEBX1Qxv9; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To: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 [68.166.38.13] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1Jz685-00075O-Mu for ltru@ietf.org; Thu, 22 May 2008 04:26:29 -0400
Message-ID: <01c301c8bbe5$8c2810c0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 01:26:34 -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: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d888a63b7957ab9b23b3cdf67d3a232bb79c584dd9db2283713d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 68.166.38.13
Subject: [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 co-chair...

Later in this message I will be asking some questions.  Please
respond to this mailing list so that the co-chairs can decide
what to instruct the editors to do regarding the general disposition
(*not* detailed wordsmithing!) of the extlang question.

Please respond no later than Saturday, May 24th, wherever you are.
Please DO NOT respond to others' responses.
If you feel compelled to include a rationale with your response,
PLEASE keep it down to a single brief sentence, and don't expect
anyone to respond to it.  If you want a conversation, start a
new thread!

We've discussed this quite enough.  About 600 messages have been
posted this month on this list, mostly on this topic.  After wading
through this mass, I'm quite convinced that while further wordsmithing
(of whatever solution we agree to) will be needed, the arguments for
and against each of the approaches were made quite some time ago.
There are conflicting considerations and analyses, and it's clear
to me there's no perfect answer that will make everyone happy.

Q1: The current draft (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-14.txt)
    does away with the "extlang" production. Possible responses: (pick ONE)
        A - I like this.
        B - I can live with this.
        C - I object to this.   

Q2: We could go back to using "extlang" in the grammar, requiring its
    use for representing "encompassed" languages that are being added.
    Possible responses:  (pick ONE)
        A - I would like this.
        B - I could live with this.
        C - I would object to this.

Randy

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email