Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (wasFW:Anomalyinupcomingregistry)

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Wed, 15 July 2009 22:15 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
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 EC1113A6F43 for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 YlIife2Kszvl for <ltru@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 176DD3A6F5D for <ltru@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:15:43 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=IEqmRd+M9H/NLi66O1ABsPEHI5I6SGFJjV+ukxPwiyift8+RmtpjWvo+EG044tyF; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [99.30.225.169] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1MRCeB-0007LG-0p for ltru@ietf.org; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:08:19 -0400
Message-ID: <007c01ca0598$f4fd76a0$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: LTRU Working Group <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <C683A5F6.F25A%kent.karlsson14@comhem.se><8D97027965E89F488BC87B919382D9FD0510BEC2@ussdixms01.am.sony.com><DDB6DE6E9D27DD478AE6D1BBBB8357956B0B299E56@NA-EXMSG-C117.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <8D97027965E89F488BC87B919382D9FD0510BED1@ussdixms01.am.sony.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:09:42 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d88884f945684cbf696852985d85bfdc807b22e895cbe6680985350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 99.30.225.169
Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (wasFW:Anomalyinupcomingregistry)
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: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:15:44 -0000

Hi -

As a technical contributor...

> From: "Broome, Karen" <Karen.Broome@am.sony.com>
> To: "Peter Constable" <petercon@microsoft.com>; "Kent Karlsson" <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>; <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>; "LTRU
Working Group" <ltru@ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 2:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] rechartering to handle 639-6 (wasFW:Anomalyinupcomingregistry)
...
> What would you suggest for an international file-naming standard that is
> composed of concatenated fixed-length components (much like BCP 47)
> where the file name needs to indicate the language of the subtitled or dubbed asset?

Such a design is inherently incompatible with the design of BCP 47.  One
might kluge around it by picking some maximum length for the language
tag portion, and right-filling the unused bits with, say, "~" or some other
bit pattern that could not be confused with a language tag.  But that would
be a hideously ugly kluge, and just shine a spotlight on the design incompatibility.

I'm wary of designs built around fixed-length components.  We were stuck
with them when we inherited the language tag work in ltru, and no realistic choice
bu to build on them. Fixed-length fields remind me too much of FORTRAN-IV
Hollerith fields, and should have gone the way of the IBM 029 keypunch's
control card.

Randy