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

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

At 2:19 PM -0500 11/20/17, Brian Rosen wrote:

>  We're not chartered to solve a problem like "what kind of 
> information is in a video: lip motion, sign language, captions?"
>  I think when you signal a sign language in a language tag, we all 
> know what to expect.  If you put anything else in a video stream, 
> we don't know what to expect, and this working group isn't 
> chartered to fix that.
>
>  So, say that, and only that: "Use of a language selection in a 
> video stream could have several meanings, including the use of sign 
> language and visible captions.  If a sign language is signaled in a 
> video stream, it is interpreted as the indicated sign language will 
> appear in the video .  This document does not define any other use 
> for language tags in video media."

What about just not saying anything in this draft?  Keep this draft 
simple.  I don't think that we run an interoperability risk if we 
avoid saying what we're not defining.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Never call a man a fool.  Borrow from him.