Re: [Ltru] [apps-discuss] Fwd: Defining a CBOR tag for RFC 5646 Language Tags

"Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org> Wed, 14 May 2014 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <doug@ewellic.org>
X-Original-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ltru@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1C511A01E6 for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 May 2014 14:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VKrWKiZ_GbkF for <ltru@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 May 2014 14:47:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plwbeout03-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtp03-05-2.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.218.217]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A5A71A01B6 for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 May 2014 14:47:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([72.167.218.245]) by p3plwbeout03-05.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with bizsmtp id 1xnH1o0025JG3DC01xnHwm; Wed, 14 May 2014 14:47:17 -0700
X-SID: 1xnH1o0025JG3DC01
Received: (qmail 24256 invoked by uid 99); 14 May 2014 21:47:17 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-Originating-IP: 208.51.143.189
User-Agent: Workspace Webmail 5.6.47
Message-Id: <20140514144716.665a7a7059d7ee80bb4d670165c8327d.4ebffc2f64.wbe@email03.secureserver.net>
From: "Doug Ewell" <doug@ewellic.org>
To: "Mark Davis =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=98=95=EF=B8=8F?=" <mark@macchiato.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 14:47:16 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ltru/vre6TmumWi6hTLgwXH6CfwZIvxQ
Cc: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
Subject: Re: [Ltru] [apps-discuss] Fwd: Defining a CBOR tag for RFC 5646 Language Tags
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 14 May 2014 21:47:26 -0000

Mark Davis ☕️ <mark at macchiato dot com> wrote:

> I'm sure you're not implying that I think invalid UTF-8 would have
> been a good idea, but your statement might not be clear to others.

To clarify, I got that impression from Dave's remark, which is why I
originally quoted it:

] Many years ago, Mark Crispin and Chris Newman had a proposal for
] embedding language tags in invalid UTF-8; I seem to recall they
] publicly renounced their proposal rather dramatically in favour of a
] Unicode Consortium proposal for embedding the language tags somewhere
] in Plane 14 - published as RFC 2482.
] 
] The fact it was all initiated in order to support the pressing needs
] of ACAP might give you some hints as to why it never really took off,
] but as a counter-proposal to language tags in metadata, it might be
] worth re-examining.

I'm not sure, upon re-reading this, whether Dave meant to say that Plane
14 tags or invalid UTF-8 was worth re-examining.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA
http://ewellic.org | @DougEwell