Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Accept-Language) vs RFC4647), was: Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags)

John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> Sat, 18 July 2009 18:02 UTC

Return-Path: <cowan@ccil.org>
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 990783A6B2C for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001]
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 xtBFX1wV4CFA for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from earth.ccil.org (earth.ccil.org [192.190.237.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E0A13A6B0E for <ltru@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1MSEBq-00018u-IT; Sat, 18 Jul 2009 13:59:18 -0400
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 13:59:18 -0400
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <20090718175918.GA3899@mercury.ccil.org>
References: <48037FF9.9030103@gmx.de> <48049274.3090501@gmx.de> <4A61B8B7.7030200@gmx.de> <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA01AB843B4F@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com> <4A61F5C2.3050906@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A61F5C2.3050906@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Issue 113 (language tag matching (Accept-Language) vs RFC4647), was: Proposed resolution for Issue 13 (language tags)
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/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 18:02:03 -0000

Julian Reschke scripsit:

> The intention was to normatively refer to that matching algorithm that 
> actually is equivalent to what RFC2616 used to define (remember, we're 
> not changing the protocol here). Did we pick the wrong one?

No, basic filtering is the RFC 2616 algorithm all right.  You might
consider allowing HTTP servers to do lookup if basic filtering
produces no results: Apache already does this.

Is there some reason why you aren't referring to BCP 47?

-- 
John Cowan  cowan@ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the
continent, a part of the main.  If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a
manor of thy friends or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for
whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.  --John Donne