Re: [Ltru] Tagging of silent films

> Well, this is a metadata standard, so part of the documentation of the
> standard
> would be "This field contains an RFC 3066 tag; the private-use tag 'qsi'

Ok, so far.

> means 'silent film'."

qsi is supposedly a *language* tag. "Silent", "film", "silent film"
does not really fit in there. If qsi in that metadata standard is
to have any language relation with respect to this, interpreting it
as "no lingustic content" (for an audio stream; or in some cases for
the images stream) would be far better. Or are we to have a language
subtag (variant) for films that does not show anyone speaking (or any
imaged text) but there is a narrative? (Like for nature/wildlife films
and the like.) I think not.

Using language tags for 'silent film', 'film with narrative' and
such would not be a suitable use of *language* tags.

Using 'und' or 'qsi' (within that context) for "no [determinable]
linguistic content" (for text, audio and imagages separate) would be
fine. And I don't think 'und' is all that wrong for that. Maybe the
sound of the talk is so faint that you didn't hear it ;-). If the
metadata standard allows for a langauge tag to be optional, leaving
the language tag out for saying "no [determinable] linguistic content"
would be fine too. If you want to distinguish "no-one is heard speaking"
from "jibberish-A" (and from "jibberish-B" etc.), which may or may not
be in some language unknown to the taggers (or just artistic, like
the "Swedish chef" in the Muppet Show), would that be worthwhile?
I'm not so sure.

   /kent k

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