Re: [Slim] Proposed 5.4 text

Gunnar Hellström <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se> Wed, 06 December 2017 20:17 UTC

Return-Path: <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
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 B4B40124B09 for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 12:17:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 wOyBz-vQcCQo for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 12:17:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bin-vsp-out-03.atm.binero.net (bin-mail-out-05.binero.net [195.74.38.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E476612426E for <slim@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Dec 2017 12:17:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Halon-ID: 82970fc3-dac2-11e7-8120-0050569116f7
Authorized-sender: gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se
Received: from [192.168.2.136] (unknown [83.209.159.245]) by bin-vsp-out-03.atm.binero.net (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 82970fc3-dac2-11e7-8120-0050569116f7; Wed, 06 Dec 2017 21:17:41 +0100 (CET)
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=c3=b6m?= <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Cc: slim@ietf.org
References: <55f2b336-3f14-f49a-ec78-f00b0373db00@omnitor.se> <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> <CAOW+2dtodRVOyGg_Q83TCPXwL3jBccA-hpBhYfrPCAUjSm5zkQ@mail.gmail.com> <E83689D8-DF61-4A3A-A5B2-8B3C05AFFB1E@brianrosen.net> <p06240607d63a5312bbbe@99.111.97.136> <72f7975c-91f5-91c2-6d8c-4f66aec63cf9@omnitor.se> <p06240609d63a644ec5b6@99.111.97.136> <CAOW+2dsP3EB8OogBU4NO917isBsOWs3VWbXK-AG88XhK7ROu4A@mail.gmail.com> <85024248-d22d-6379-6194-fdb17c4c913a@ntlworld.com> <93ec6be8-1ced-e6da-3693-6cf66069c50c@omnitor.se> <p0624060dd64ca3a860c9@[99.111.97.136]> <920ae4bc-0c0b-d571-4b9b-bdc2b08bba4b@omnitor.se> <2B21087E-D5E1-4817-BD57-6F5E6E6000F1@gmail.com> <b3b6efb9-ab6c-020e-9636-6b05f6875927@omnitor.se>
Message-ID: <c318cd17-c0fa-203a-250e-093c8a2a6593@omnitor.se>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 21:17:46 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b3b6efb9-ab6c-020e-9636-6b05f6875927@omnitor.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------8DD2EB97D08B83651AA572EB"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/slim/Jp11i-pKkn0qSZzI44Jg_EhAGbI>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Proposed 5.4 text
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: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 20:17:56 -0000

I need to correct my statement that I have not seen the construct . 
"non-sign language" before. Now I have.

A very rough search gave hits where the use is quite similar to how it 
is used in draft version -19 in a term containing some more words as 
specifiers to a noun at the end.

Example 1:

https://www.cio.com/article/2381300/vertical-industries/microsoft-uses-kinect-to-interpret-sign-language-from-deaf-people.html

Search for "non-sign", and you will find:
"It's thought that the system could help deaf users make presentations 
to non-sign language speaking crowds."

Example 2:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/

Search for "non-sign" and you will find:

"Several researchers (Corina et al., 1992 
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R5>;Emmorey et 
al., 2004 
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R8>;Marshall and 
Fink, 2001 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2693477/#R17>) 
have established that different neural systems subserve sign language 
production and non-sign language pantomimic expression."

I think that that confirms that the issue can be closed using any of the 
now 5 solutions I have presented.


Gunnar


Den 2017-12-06 kl. 18:21, skrev Gunnar Hellström:
>
> Even if I have said that for me we can close the issue keeping the 
> current wording, I want to explain my view of the wording and test a 
> new proposal.
>
> It is the term "non-sign language tag" we discuss.
>
> That makes the "tag" to be the main noun, and what is before it can be 
> seen as specifiers for "tag". I get the impression that Keith has seen 
> this and want to make that clear.
>
> However, the "non-sign" rather applies to the language. It is for when 
> the language is not a signed language we want to express the 
> conditions for use of the tag. My proposal #4 is intended to make that 
> very clear, but resulted in inconveniently complex wording.
>
> I want to try a compromise: "tag for a non-signed language"
>
> I use "non-signed" instead or "non-sign" because "non-signed" is used 
> elsewhere while I never saw "non-sign" before. Non-signed is also a 
> self-sustained verb, while I do not really know what "non-sign" is 
> grammatically.
>
> That makes a new wording proposal for 5.4 be:
> ------------------new 
> wording----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   A sign language tag with a video media stream is interpreted as an
>     indication for sign language in the video stream.  A tag for a non-signed
>     language with a text media stream is interpreted as an indication
>     for written language in the text stream.  A tag for a non-signed language
>     with an audio media stream is interpreted as an indication for spoken
>     language in the audio stream.
>
>     This document does not define any other use for language tags in
>     video media (such as how to indicate visible captions in the video
>     stream).
>
>     In the IANA registry of language subtags perBCP 47 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47>  [RFC5646 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5646>], a
>     language subtag with a Type field "extlang" combined with a Prefix
>     field value "sgn" indicates a tag for a sign language.  The absence of such
>     "sgn" prefix indicates a tag for a non-signed language.
> ------------------end of new wording---------------------------------------
>   Is this more acceptable by all?
>
> /Gunnar
>
> Den 2017-12-06 kl. 02:21, skrev Bernard Aboba:
>> I can live with #1.
>>
>>> On Dec 5, 2017, at 5:29 PM, Gunnar Hellström<gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Den 2017-12-05 kl. 20:27, skrev Randall Gellens:
>>>> The argument over the use of "non-" is pointless and a waste of time. We should not keep reopening it.  The draft clear and unambiguous.
>>> I tend to agree.
>>> I provided four alternatives in order to try to reach consensus:
>>>
>>> 1. Leave "non-sign" as is.
>>>
>>> 2. Replace "non-sign language" with "non-sign-language".
>>>
>>> 3. Replace "non-sign" with "non-signed"
>>>
>>> 4. Replace "non-sign language tag" with "language tag for a language that is not signed"
>>>
>>> I can accept any of these, but have myself a slight preference for #3, "non-signed".
>>>
>>> Now, since Randall still prefers #1, I suggest that we close the issue with the conclusion that we keep it as it is in -19.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Gunnar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> Gunnar Hellström
>>> Omnitor
>>> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se
>>> +46 708 204 288
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SLIM mailing list
>>> SLIM@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim
>
> -- 
> -----------------------------------------
> Gunnar Hellström
> Omnitor
> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se
> +46 708 204 288

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Gunnar Hellström
Omnitor
gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se
+46 708 204 288