Re: [Ltru] Consensus call: extlang

"Kent Karlsson" <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se> Thu, 29 May 2008 08:08 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 18C333A6982; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:08:03 -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 621DE3A699A for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:08:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 LilJbzi13Ytn for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net (ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net [80.76.149.212]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5EA3A6982 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c83-248-80-178.bredband.comhem.se ([83.248.80.178]:33072 helo=wgbgkka02x) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>) id 1K1dB1-0004wb-5h; Thu, 29 May 2008 10:07:59 +0200
From: Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>
To: "'Broome, Karen'" <Karen_Broome@spe.sony.com>, ltru@ietf.org
References: <422633.90603.qm@web31813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <E19FDBD7A3A7F04788F00E90915BD36C13C2528ABB@USSDIXMSG20.spe.sony.com>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:07:52 +0200
Message-ID: <002d01c8c163$1c3186b0$0201a8c0@streamserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-Index: AcjBJ+pzUbf8k/5gRcepzRoTLFZE7gAC3iJpAAtGj2A=
In-Reply-To: <E19FDBD7A3A7F04788F00E90915BD36C13C2528ABB@USSDIXMSG20.spe.sony.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Originating-IP: 83.248.80.178
X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1K1dB1-0004wb-5h.
X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1K1dB1-0004wb-5h 0bec5af165537192b5f02afcd355899e
Subject: Re: [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

 
Broome, Karen wrote:
> I thought the primary goal was identification, not fallback. 
> Without extlang, we lose some information the ISO standards 
> otherwise contain. 

You seem to be arguing for (in an ideal case) a partial
language family hierarcy in each tag. Tags like

gem-de (or gem-deu)

or even

und-ine-gem-de-gsw

and the like. Of course that is not possible to introduce, for
several reasons. I'm just trying to understand your argument.
As Mark mentioned, the individual language codes do identify
a language, without explicitly giving any part of the
hierarchy in the tag.

	/kent k

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