[Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5646 (5457)
RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Sun, 12 August 2018 19:28 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 910C2130DD9 for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J2vCY-pIQ2kl for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EEE61286E3 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 4368FB81940; Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: addison@inter-locale.com, markdavis@google.com, ben@nostrum.com, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, adam@nostrum.com, randy_presuhn@mindspring.com, duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: poccil14@gmail.com, ltru@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20180812192817.4368FB81940@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:28:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ltru/lhuLLkpyAWBKbTMmr680oJ2ALgQ>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 12 Aug 2018 12:58:34 -0700
Subject: [Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5646 (5457)
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2018 19:28:26 -0000
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5646, "Tags for Identifying Languages". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5457 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Peter Occil <poccil14@gmail.com> Section: 2.2.9 Original Text ------------- A tag is considered "valid" if it satisfies these conditions: o The tag is well-formed. o Either the tag is in the list of grandfathered tags or all of its primary language, extended language, script, region, and variant subtags appear in the IANA Language Subtag Registry as of the particular registry date. o There are no duplicate variant subtags. o There are no duplicate singleton (extension) subtags. Corrected Text -------------- A tag is considered "valid" if it satisfies these conditions: o The tag is well-formed. o Either the tag is in the list of grandfathered tags or all of its primary language, extended language, script, region, and variant subtags appear in the IANA Language Subtag Registry as of the particular registry date. o There are no duplicate variant subtags. o There are no duplicate singleton (extension) subtags. o There is no more than one extended language subtag. Notes ----- Sec. 2.2.2 contains an additional validity requirement (point 4): the existence of no more than one extended language subtag. This is not reflected in the definition of validity given in sec. 2.2.9 of the RFC. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5646 (draft-ietf-ltru-4646bis-23) -------------------------------------- Title : Tags for Identifying Languages Publication Date : September 2009 Author(s) : A. Phillips, Ed., M. Davis, Ed. Category : BEST CURRENT PRACTICE Source : Language Tag Registry Update Area : Applications Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG
- [Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5646 (5457) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5646 (5… John Cowan
- Re: [Ltru] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5646 (5… Phillips, Addison