Re: [Slim] Negotiation issue in draft-ietf-slim-negotiating-human-language

Gunnar Hellström <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se> Sat, 17 February 2018 22:21 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 228C112D72F for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:21:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 slkIvQG23xLD for <slim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:21:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bin-vsp-out-01.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 673AE1250B8 for <slim@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:21:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Halon-ID: d1f9ff2e-1430-11e8-93ce-005056917a89
Authorized-sender: gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se
Received: from [192.168.2.136] (unknown [87.96.161.61]) by bin-vsp-out-01.atm.binero.net (Halon) with ESMTPSA id d1f9ff2e-1430-11e8-93ce-005056917a89; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 23:20:55 +0100 (CET)
To: Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Cc: slim@ietf.org
References: <CAOW+2dtV5EaL_xTLSJNSiNjUZp-ZzFa2cMPUvSb65FRyYSNB1Q@mail.gmail.com> <6754134E-63FD-4212-90D5-D07293EFE36B@randy.pensive.org> <09dcffcc-a65d-65d8-614d-fa12b790dd4f@omnitor.se> <CAOW+2ds680XB2v9TavT00_CAQAo9FHmDbfXNodeZ9=NFh1=jEA@mail.gmail.com> <EB90D6A9-FE9A-4DC2-9C0D-EC7EDF513F7E@randy.pensive.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=c3=b6m?= <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
Message-ID: <5c33acfd-8853-4254-c6b1-fa05ea4901fd@omnitor.se>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 23:20:58 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <EB90D6A9-FE9A-4DC2-9C0D-EC7EDF513F7E@randy.pensive.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------E3880CF47DFCEA9CA9BB52FB"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/slim/Q1p8ksnCfxhm5rWQdTxSQAvFAjg>
Subject: Re: [Slim] Negotiation issue in 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: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 22:21:12 -0000

I agree with Randall. No more normative or descriptive language is 
needed. There is already a warning against providing language 
indications that will be hard to match. That will happen if you decide 
to answer with a language that was not in the offer. But it is better 
than answering with no language indication and it indicates how you 
might answer the call.

There is however one small adjustment to do. The sentence about having 
the languages in preference order in the lists should be included also 
in the paragraph about the answer in 5.2.  Or it could be pulled out 
from the paragraph about the offer and put in a common paragraph below 
both paragraphs about the offer and the answer. And the lists should be 
in plural in the sentence.
Here the sentence is attached last in the paragraph about the answer:
-----------------------------5.2 paragraph about the answer, with new 
sentence attached last------------------------------------------

  In an answer, 'hlang-send' is a list of one or more languages the answerer might send if
    using the media for language (which in most cases contains one or more of the
    languages in the offer's 'hlang-recv'), and 'hlang-recv' is a list of one or more of the
    languages the answerer is prepared to receive if using the media for
    language (which in most cases contains one or more of the languages in the offer's
    'hlang-send'). The lists of languages are in preference order (first is most
    preferred).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/Gunnar





Den 2018-02-17 kl. 10:52, skrev Randall Gellens:
>
> Hi Bernard,
>
> Putting a language in an answer that was not in the offer is an 
> unusual case (as the text says). I don’t think we need to add more 
> text (normative or descriptive) about it.
>
> —Randall
>
> On 16 Feb 2018, at 19:36, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>
>     Yes, the proposed changes seem good. One question: is there enough
>     normative language about adding languages to an Answer that were
>     not in the Offer? For example, can this only occur if the Answerer
>     has no languages in common with the Offerer? Or can an Answerer
>     add any languages(s) they would put into an Offer if roles were
>     reversed?
>
>     On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 02:39 Gunnar Hellström
>     <gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se <mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>>
>     wrote:
>
>         I find that the changes to version -23 prepared by Randall and
>         provided in this archive mail are good:
>         https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/slim/current/msg01289.html
>
>         That version allows answers to contain languages not contained
>         in the offer (that was already allowed and well specified in
>         version -23),
>         and allows multiple languages per media and direction in the
>         answer.
>
>         I think both of these conditions are good and important for
>         successful use of the draft.
>         We need to imagine all kinds of feasible applications, e.g.
>         the decision on including interpreting resources taken by the
>         offeror after receiving the answer. That calls for providing
>         the full and true picture about the supported languages in the
>         answer.
>
>         So, I repeat my comment from
>         https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/slim/current/msg01297.html
>         "I find the diff you sent to be good, and also version -23
>         solving all other issues in a good way. So, I vote for
>         applying your proposed changes on -23 and hope that that can
>         be the final version."
>
>         Gunnar
>>
>>
>>         --Randall
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         SLIM mailing list
>>         SLIM@ietf.org <mailto:SLIM@ietf.org>
>>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim
>
>         -- 
>         -----------------------------------------
>         Gunnar Hellström
>         Omnitor
>         gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se <mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se>
>         +46 708 204 288
>
>
>
> --Randall
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SLIM mailing list
> SLIM@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/slim

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