Re: [Slim] Moving forward on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language

Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Mon, 20 November 2017 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: slim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: slim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD7612EA52 for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 tquE2J8w6SP1 for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ua0-x232.google.com (mail-ua0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFEB512EA42 for <slim@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ua0-x232.google.com with SMTP id q18so6631131uaa.0 for <slim@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LXFDNGajlfyfHt3whZtqMyfoTkHR3pxldLqF1CeeFcA=; b=BhZpsKts+Ae/RJtzM3rCcO6Z/96ZztnoTPRxNvoQHvixZmDb2WXJi/+P5t5LOBKf4H 2Ec8O6K4ZNhcP/qFnzJae3nVT+4DYcNxLXOT78kr2eO5o/14sOyoRFI6xdYbNVRtYX/Y Alyh/QcpnJEna9UjP+bHfqCOKEHJn4FYE005n68t5VMetcxm7Htsz9Mz4pjMo0zDAaGN 2cBwrtVjeEmnyeiyXTFameSfXOsXKxo9A4ukc7LKEhp5gW9tXltv/J8KznY41gBL7Mev 4f0a/cMHc2MSpaCcjYUq2zLFuK2FPCqFVFBd4Idcoa+SZO7f9MQUx/2CVrCJPd8Cv29v 0vjQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LXFDNGajlfyfHt3whZtqMyfoTkHR3pxldLqF1CeeFcA=; b=JS6ZXUaWX57e5nA5DPp2XGm0jiRbp51YNklhoCUJWVx6kvcFjr/R9d71/gP8Ja6j29 yXOMIqnsNF7mrLpBcRbiUO58LXncYSwoUy3hL1I0LKB0j/i4FoZ1yw8zsV9+Wv0eEfkI bdHLP9Cf0fGb9Xcsu8/OkPJfe/f0nL7/I8/gJtqVNphcgu2qnKnz6xgLF3sT1iskzHrT 2R6A+fqe4a78j47hkNrr6Z01wdSnUFk78HU1lXcCHB2B1mgs+IKPbesh9WnDpe2exgJg wrcjNPsPLYkGyTJ+pVw9lD/OSyTpL6Qt2+vnQIBx/hl1t0sfXRJ+teL3C8MpPpbUFquq krIw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5xnFIgUPwGUjXWzt5wBAZ6jOxH19dI/+6vVFw0FUDBve0OhF3r dGJKuD6kb8YADccyyN9cLaG02yU91s7aetiyTkY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbIsBsMZJfCRDqsrcqPRF6tVZpLQ459KHpZDFkkSWHL33OyzejVzyC6D/s2HIEaayBSt5aIwtoSnw8okLnl6NI=
X-Received: by 10.176.71.226 with SMTP id w34mr13745113uac.33.1511205035585; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:35 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.54.230 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <6812d89a-ba10-0947-5320-07374b8c071d@comcast.net>
References: <CAOW+2dsZtuciPiKMfif=ZmUqBcUd9TyYtL5gPYDp7ZfLOHHDBA@mail.gmail.com> <p06240600d637c6f98ecc@99.111.97.136> <CAOW+2dv5NSiCbW=p1exvPV=PF8YCVdiz2gi-OCxmaUB-jGe22w@mail.gmail.com> <p06240600d6389cd2043f@99.111.97.136> <97d9a6b8-de3b-9f79-483b-18376fcf0ced@omnitor.se> <CAOW+2dtpRoeYkMJzX9vyNUojJDax4DQUU2F4PauBwt1sm-83Hg@mail.gmail.com> <6812d89a-ba10-0947-5320-07374b8c071d@comcast.net>
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:10:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOW+2dtodRVOyGg_Q83TCPXwL3jBccA-hpBhYfrPCAUjSm5zkQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Kyzivat <paul.kyzivat@comcast.net>
Cc: slim@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4030437919854395a055e6ed7d8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/slim/913hFVBfTzd5LOn78WKunEfihq0>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Moving forward on draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language
X-BeenThere: slim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Selection of Language for Internet Media <slim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/slim>, <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/slim/>
List-Post: <mailto:slim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim>, <mailto:slim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 19:10:39 -0000

Paul said:

"ISTM the real problem is with language tags in video media. These could
indicate that the lip motions of people in the video reflect speakers of
the tagged language. Or they could indicate written text in the specified
language is embedded in the video. (Could be closed caption text or just
signage.) Or (in the case of signed language tags) it could indicate use of
sign language in the video.

But in the end, if this is declarative about what is being sent then it
isn't clear whether it is important. If it is an indication of what is
being requested, then it is more important."

[BA] Yes, that is the core of the problem.  As has been noted earlier, the
modality isn't indicated explicitly. I'm not sure whether we have enough
experience to know whether this represents an important deficit.  But we
could indicate that the problem potentially exists and that further work
might be needed.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Paul Kyzivat <paul.kyzivat@comcast.net>
wrote:

> On 11/20/17 1:41 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>
> [BA]  This is where the ground gets less solid - we don't really have a
>> general mechanism for distinguishing spoken and written modality among
>> non-signed languages. Perhaps we should just say "language tags in audio
>> media indicate spoken modality and language tags in text media indicate
>> written modality".
>>
>
> ISTM the real problem is with language tags in video media. These could
> indicate that the lip motions of people in the video reflect speakers of
> the tagged language. Or they could indicate written text in the specified
> language is embedded in the video. (Could be closed caption text or just
> signage.) Or (in the case of signed language tags) it could indicate use of
> sign language in the video.
>
> But in the end, if this is declarative about what is being sent then it
> isn't clear whether it is important. If it is an indication of what is
> being requested, then it is more important.
>
>         Thanks,
>         Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SLIM mailing list
> SLIM@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim
>