IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field

Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com> Tue, 10 October 2006 06:01 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXAgN-0005KG-A1; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:01:40 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXAgL-0005HN-Mg for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:01:37 -0400
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com ([131.107.115.212]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXAfO-0003Lw-CM for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:00:43 -0400
Received: from mailout5.microsoft.com (157.54.69.148) by TK5-EXGWY-E801.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.0.647.8; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 23:00:35 -0700
Received: from RED-MSG-52.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.61.148]) by mailout5.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2786); Mon, 9 Oct 2006 23:00:11 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 22:55:11 -0700
Message-ID: <F8ACB1B494D9734783AAB114D0CE68FE0B1B1977@RED-MSG-52.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <452AD980.8050301@yahoo-inc.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Ltru] Re: Proposal: include new "Language-Type:" field
thread-index: Acbr+butH4RBKxc+StGXRhYmNQDPSwANW0dA
References: <789E617C880666438EDEE30C2A3E8D10EF2F@mailsrvnt05.enet.sharplabs.com> <452AD980.8050301@yahoo-inc.com>
From: Peter Constable <petercon@microsoft.com>
To: Addison Phillips <addison@yahoo-inc.com>, "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2006 06:00:11.0382 (UTC) FILETIME=[58C9F160:01C6EC31]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
Cc: ltru@ietf.org
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1017998157=="
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org


-----Original Message-----
From: Addison Phillips [mailto:addison@yahoo-inc.com] 

> Upon further review, I find that I'm more of Mark's persuasion. John's 
> proposal appeared, at first, to me to provide some way to distinguish 
> "collective" languages and "macro-languages", but, in fact, it only 
> distinguishes the former and not the latter.

I kind of expect you'll see these attributes carried over into other parts of ISO 639 in the future.


> It then goes on to 
> distinguish a number of other language characteristics (most of which 
> are inherent in the language itself: users of the respective languages 
> know that Middle English is "ancient" or "extinct", or that Klingon is 
> constructed)

But that's not the only point. If someone is looking at an entry "Foo" and trying to figure out if it's referring to the same language they know as "Phu", which is spoken in New Phuinea, seeing that it's type is Constructed (say), or Ancient (say) would give them a strong clue that it's not.



> I would support John's proposal fully if and only if it distinguished 
> collective and macro languages for use in the registration process.

I certainly think we should identify categories with both of these scopes clearly.



Peter Constable

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email