Subject: [Ltru] Re: "mis" update review request

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 15:15:38 -0700

John Cowan <cowan at ccil dot org> wrote:

> Peter Constable scripsit:
>
>> und means 'I have not determined what the language attribute is of 
>> this information object.'
>>
>> mul means 'I have detected that this information object contains at 
>> least one portion X in some language Lx and a different portion Y in 
>> some different language Ly.'
>>
>> mis means 'I have determined that this information object is in a 
>> language other than the set of languages covered by the available 
>> identifiers.'
>>
>> zxx means 'I have determined that this information object is not 
>> expressed in terms of a human language.'
>
> IMHO this language should go into 4646bis, of course made more formal.

+1.  Doing this would be preferable to annotating "mis" and friends in 
the Registry.

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages 

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

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:16:22 +0200

> +1.  Doing this would be preferable to annotating "mis" and friends in

No, users including taggers read at best the registry record, not the
specification.  A warning about such dangerously misleading tags like
"mis" needs to be in the registry.  Or we exclude "mis" from 4645bis.

Stability is no issue, a tag where nobody (maybe minus John and Peter)
knows or agrees what it means is anyway hopeless.

Frank