Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: proto-draft-10

John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org> Tue, 04 December 2007 00:35 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzLlB-0008JO-QP; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:35:37 -0500
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IzLlA-0008Hz-Mf for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:35:36 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzLlA-0008Hl-Cc for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:35:36 -0500
Received: from earth.ccil.org ([192.190.237.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzLl8-0005Mg-0A for ltru@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:35:36 -0500
Received: from cowan by earth.ccil.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <cowan@ccil.org>) id 1IzLl7-0000Xb-Nt; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:35:33 -0500
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:35:33 -0500
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] Re: Re: proto-draft-10
Message-ID: <20071204003533.GE15972@mercury.ccil.org>
References: <47544CA9.5000805@yahoo-inc.com> <fj1qq9$97h$1@ger.gmane.org> <20071203225946.GC15972@mercury.ccil.org> <fj24ds$agg$1@ger.gmane.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <fj24ds$agg$1@ger.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Cc: ltru@lists.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>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

Frank Ellermann scripsit:

> Okay, then we might agree to disagree.  The main difference between
> "liaden" and "i-liaden" is that the former allows "liaden-Hant-fonupa"
> while the latter has to be used as is.

Quite so.

> There are no registered languages, so what's the point of allowing
> the full set of BCP 47 features for them ?

Because if and when we need them, there's no reason they
shouldn't interoperate with the rest of the system.

> For cases like i-default I don't miss any default-Hant-fonupa
> opportunity.

i-default is very special.

> As explained earlier  5*8( ALPHA )  limits implementation freedom if
> there would be ever a variant and a language using the same subtag.

Rules for the first subtag don't apply to later subtags, period.
The fact that you'd like them all to be unique doesn't make it so.

-- 
Take two turkeys, one goose, four               John Cowan
cabbages, but no duck, and mix them             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
together. After one taste, you'll duck          cowan@ccil.org
soup the rest of your life.
        --Groucho


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