Subject: RE: [Ltru] WG last call for draft-ietf-ltru-matching

From: "McDonald, Ira" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:34:06 -0800

Hi John,

On the contrary, the whole point is that ALL applications
SHOULD NOT send unnecessary subtags to other applications,
protocols, or systems.

And language about not stripping unsupported subtags when
"forwarding" them will be (thank goodness) ignored by
sensible implementors.  The first doctor who finds the
cancer cuts it out.

Cheers,
- Ira 

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: [email-masked]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 4:58 PM
> To: Addison Phillips
> Cc: 'Debbie Garside'; 'LTRU Working Group'
> Subject: Re: [Ltru] WG last call for draft-ietf-ltru-matching
> 
> 
> Addison Phillips scripsit:
> 
> > A protocol or application that consumes language tags MAY 
> remove unsupported
> > extensions or subtags to make processing more efficient, as 
> long as the
> > truncated tag is not forwarded to other processes.
> 
> "outside the scope of the protocol or application".
> 
> The whole point of this hooraw is that IPP clients shouldn't 
> send script
> subtags to IPP servers.
> 
> -- 
> John Cowan  [email-masked]  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.ap.org
> The penguin geeks is happy / As under the waves they lark
> The closed-source geeks ain't happy / They sad cause they in the dark
> But geeks in the dark is lucky / They in for a worser treat
> One day when the Borg go belly-up / Guess who wind up on the street.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
> 

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru